Dataset Information

Association between hospital-reported Leapfrog Safe Practices Scores and inpatient mortality.

ABSTRACT:

Context

The Leapfrog Hospital Survey allows hospitals to self-report the steps they have taken toward implementing the Safe Practices for Better Healthcare endorsed by the National Quality Forum. The Leapfrog Group currently ranks hospital performance on the safe practices initiative by quartiles and presents this information to the public on its Web site. It is unknown how well a hospital's resulting Safe Practices Score (SPS) correlates with outcomes such as inpatient mortality.

Objective

To determine the relationship between hospitals' SPSs and risk-adjusted inpatient mortality rates.

Design, setting, and participants

Observational analysis of discharge data for all urban US hospitals completing the 2006 safe practices initiative and identifiable in the Nationwide Inpatient Sample. Leapfrog provided an SPS for each hospital as well as 3 alternative scores based on shorter versions of the original survey. Hierarchical logistic regression was used to determine the relationship between quartiles of SPS and risk-adjusted inpatient mortality, after adjusting for hospital discharge volume and teaching status. Subgroup analyses were performed using data from patients older than 65 years and patients with 5% or greater expected mortality risk.

Main outcome measures

Inpatient risk-adjusted mortality by quartiles of survey score.

Results

Of 1075 hospitals completing the 2006 Safe Practices Survey, 155 (14%) were identifiable in the National Inpatient Sample (1,772,064 discharges). Raw observed mortality in the primary sample was 2.09%. Fully adjusted mortality rates by quartile of SPS, from lowest to highest, were 1.97% (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.78%-2.18%), 2.04% (95% CI, 1.84%-2.25%), 1.96% (95% CI, 1.77%-2.16%), and 2.00% (95% CI, 1.80%-2.22%) (P = .99 for linear trend). Results were similar in the subgroup analyses. None of the 3 alternative survey scores was associated with risk-adjusted inpatient mortality, although P values for linear trends were lower (.80, .20, and .11).

Conclusion

In this sample of hospitals that completed the 2006 Safe Practices Survey, survey scores were not significantly associated with risk-adjusted inpatient mortality.

SUBMITTER: Kernisan LP

PROVIDER: S-EPMC2851624 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:IntroductionAcute respiratory failure (ARF) has a high mortality rate, and currently, there is no convenient risk predictor. The coagulation disorder score was proven to be a promising metric for predicting in-hospital mortality, but its role in ARF patients remains unknown.MethodsIn this retrospective study, data were extracted from the Medical Information Mart for Intensive Care IV (MIMIC-IV) database. Patients diagnosed with ARF and hospitalized for more than 2 days at their first admission were included. The coagulation disorder score was defined based on the sepsis-induced coagulopathy score and was calculated by parameters, namely, additive platelet count (PLT), international normalized ratio (INR), and activated partial thromboplastin time (APTT), based on which the participants were divided into six groups.ResultsOverall, 5,284 ARF patients were enrolled. The in-hospital mortality rate was 27.9%. High levels of additive platelet score, INR score, and APTT score were significantly associated with increased mortality in ARF patients (P < 0.001). Binary logistic regression analysis showed that a higher coagulation disorder score was significantly related to the increased risk of in-hospital mortality in ARF patients (Model 2: coagulation disorder score = 6 vs. coagulation disorder score = 0: OR, 95% CI: 7.09, 4.07-12.34, P < 0.001). The AUC of the coagulation disorder score was 0.611 (P < 0.001), which was smaller than that of sequential organ failure assessment (SOFA) (De-long test P = 0.014) and simplified acute physiology score II (SAPS II) (De-long test P < 0.001) but larger than that of additive platelet count (De-long test P < 0.001), INR (De-long test P < 0.001), and APTT (De-long test P < 0.001), respectively. In subgroup analysis, we found that in-hospital mortality was markedly elevated with an increased coagulation disorder score in ARF patients. No significant interactions were observed in most subgroups. Of note, patients who did not administrate oral anticoagulant had a higher risk of in-hospital mortality than those who administrated oral anticoagulant (P for interaction = 0.024).ConclusionThis study found a significant positive association between coagulation disorder scores and in-hospital mortality. The coagulation disorder score was superior to the single indicators (additive platelet count, INR, or APTT) and inferior to SAPS II and SOFA for predicting in-hospital mortality in ARF patients.

Project description:BackgroundHigh adiposity is associated with higher risks for a variety of adverse health outcomes, including higher rates of age-adjusted mortality and increased morbidity. This has important implications for the management of healthcare systems, since the endocrinal, cardiometabolic and other changes associated with increased adiposity may be associated with substantial healthcare costs.MethodsWe studied the association between various measures of adiposity and inpatient hospital costs through record linkage between UK Biobank and records of inpatient care in England and Wales. UK Biobank is a large prospective cohort study that aimed to recruit men and women aged between 40 and 69 from 2006 to 2010. We applied generalised linear models to cost per person year to estimate the marginal effect of adiposity, and average adjusted predicted costs of adiposity.ResultsValid cost and body mass index (BMI) data from 457,689 participants were available for inferential analysis. Some 54.4% of individuals included in the analysis sample had positive inpatient healthcare costs over the period of follow-up. Median hospital costs per person-year of follow-up were £89, compared to mean costs of £481. Mean BMI overall was 27.4 kg/m2 (standard deviation 4.8). The marginal effect of a unit increase in BMI was £13.61 (99% confidence interval £12.60-£14.63) per person-year of follow up. The marginal effect of a standard deviation increase in BMI was £69.20 (99% confidence interval £64.98-£73.42). The marginal effect of becoming obese was £136.35 (99% confidence interval £124.62-£148.08). Average adjusted predicted inpatient hospital costs increased almost linearly when modelled using continuous measure of adiposity. Sensitivity analysis of different scenarios did not substantially change these conclusions, although there was some evidence of attenuation of the effects of adiposity when controlling for waist-hip ratios, and when individuals who self-reported any pre-existing conditions were excluded from analysis.ConclusionsHigher adiposity is associated with higher inpatient hospital costs. Further scrutiny using causal inferential methods is warranted to establish if further public health investments are required to manage the large healthcare costs observationally associated with overweight and obesity.