Literature DB >> 32844435

Evaluating inpatient adverse outcomes under California's Delivery System Reform Incentive Payment Program.

Michelle S Keller1,2, Xiao Chen3, Jamie Godwin2,3, Jack Needleman2,3, Nadereh Pourat2,3.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: The California Delivery System Reform Incentive Payment Program (DSRIP) provided incentive payments to Designated Public Hospitals (DPHs) to improve quality of care. We assessed the program's impact on reductions in sepsis mortality, central line-associated bloodstream infections (CLABSIs), venous thromboembolisms (VTEs), and hospital-acquired pressure ulcers (HAPUs). DATA SOURCES: We used 2009-2014 discharge data from California hospitals. STUDY
DESIGN: We used a pre-post study design with a comparison group. We constructed propensity scores and used them to assign inverse probability weights according to their similarity to DPH discharges. Interaction term coefficients of time trends and treatment group provided significance testing. DATA EXTRACTION: We used Patient Safety Indicators for CLABSI, HAPU, and VTE, and constructed a sepsis mortality measure. PRINCIPAL
FINDINGS: Discharges from DPHs and non-DPHs both saw decreases in the four outcomes over the DSRIP period (2010-2014). The difference-in-difference estimator (DD) for sepsis was only significant during two time periods, comparing 2010 with 2012 (DD: -2.90 percent, 95% CI: -5.08, -0.72 percent) and 2010 with 2014 (DD: -5.74, 95% CI: -8.76 percent, -2.72 percent); the DD estimator was not significant comparing 2010 with 2012 (DD: -1.30, 95% CI: -3.18 percent, 0.58 percent) or comparing 2010 with 2013 (DD: -3.05 percent, 95% CI: -6.50 percent, 0.40 percent). For CLABSI, we did not find any meaningful differences between DPHs and non-DPHs across the four time periods. For HAPU and VTE, the only significant DD estimator compared 2014 with 2010.
CONCLUSIONS: We did not find that DPHs participating in DSRIP outperformed non-DPHs during the DSRIP program. Our results were robust to multiple sensitivity analyses. Given multiple concurrent inpatient safety initiatives, it was challenging to assign improvements over time periods to DSRIP.
© 2020 Health Research and Educational Trust.

Entities:  

Keywords:  hospital-acquired infections; pay for performance; pressure ulcers; sepsis

Mesh:

Year:  2020        PMID: 32844435      PMCID: PMC7839637          DOI: 10.1111/1475-6773.13550

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Health Serv Res        ISSN: 0017-9124            Impact factor:   3.734


  25 in total

1.  Venous thromboembolism: a public health concern.

Authors:  Michele G Beckman; W Craig Hooper; Sara E Critchley; Thomas L Ortel
Journal:  Am J Prev Med       Date:  2010-04       Impact factor: 5.043

2.  Evaluating the quality of medical care. 1966.

Authors:  Avedis Donabedian
Journal:  Milbank Q       Date:  2005       Impact factor: 4.911

3.  Now trending: Coping with non-parallel trends in difference-in-differences analysis.

Authors:  Andrew M Ryan; Evangelos Kontopantelis; Ariel Linden; James F Burgess
Journal:  Stat Methods Med Res       Date:  2018-11-25       Impact factor: 3.021

4.  Comparison of trends in sepsis incidence and coding using administrative claims versus objective clinical data.

Authors:  Chanu Rhee; Michael V Murphy; Lingling Li; Richard Platt; Michael Klompas
Journal:  Clin Infect Dis       Date:  2014-09-25       Impact factor: 9.079

5.  Outcomes of primary and catheter-related bacteremia. A cohort and case-control study in critically ill patients.

Authors:  B Renaud; C Brun-Buisson
Journal:  Am J Respir Crit Care Med       Date:  2001-06       Impact factor: 21.405

6.  The Sepsis Early Recognition and Response Initiative (SERRI).

Authors:  Stephen L Jones; Carol M Ashton; Lisa Kiehne; Elizabeth Gigliotti; Charyl Bell-Gordon; Theresa T Pinn; Shirley K Tran; Juan C Nicolas; Alexis L Rose; Beverly A Shirkey; Maureen Disbot; Faisal Masud; Nelda P Wray
Journal:  Jt Comm J Qual Patient Saf       Date:  2016-03

Review 7.  Optimizing the prevention of venous thromboembolism: recent quality initiatives and strategies to drive improvement.

Authors:  Alpesh N Amin; Steven B Deitelzweig
Journal:  Jt Comm J Qual Patient Saf       Date:  2009-11

8.  Random-effects, fixed-effects and the within-between specification for clustered data in observational health studies: a simulation study.

Authors:  Joseph L Dieleman; Tara Templin
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2014-10-24       Impact factor: 3.240

9.  Evaluating inpatient adverse outcomes under California's Delivery System Reform Incentive Payment Program.

Authors:  Michelle S Keller; Xiao Chen; Jamie Godwin; Jack Needleman; Nadereh Pourat
Journal:  Health Serv Res       Date:  2020-08-26       Impact factor: 3.734

10.  CDC Grand Rounds: preventing hospital-associated venous thromboembolism.

Authors:  Michael B Streiff; Jeffrey P Brady; Althea M Grant; Scott D Grosse; Betty Wong; Tanja Popovic
Journal:  MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep       Date:  2014-03-07       Impact factor: 17.586

View more
  1 in total

1.  Evaluating inpatient adverse outcomes under California's Delivery System Reform Incentive Payment Program.

Authors:  Michelle S Keller; Xiao Chen; Jamie Godwin; Jack Needleman; Nadereh Pourat
Journal:  Health Serv Res       Date:  2020-08-26       Impact factor: 3.734

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.