Dataset Information

Hospitalist utilization and hospital performance on 6 publicly reported patient outcomes.

ABSTRACT: The increase in hospitalist-provided inpatient care may be accompanied by an expectation of improvement on patient outcomes. To date, the association between utilization of hospitalists and the publicly reported patient outcomes is unknown.Assess the relationship between hospitalist utilization and performance on 6 publicly reported patient outcomes.Cross-sectional study.Representatives of 598 hospitals in the United States with direct knowledge of inpatient service models.Survey of hospital personnel with knowledge of hospitalist use and hospitalist programs.Six publicly reported quality outcome measures across 3 medical conditions: acute myocardial infarction (AMI), congestive heart failure (HF), and pneumonia. Using multivariable regression models, we assessed the relationship between presence of hospitalists and performance on each outcome measure; we further assessed the relationship between the percentage of patients admitted by hospitalists and each outcome measure.Of 598 respondents, 429 (72%) reported the use of hospitalist services. In the comparison of hospitals with and without hospitalists, there was no statistically significant difference on any of the mortality or readmissions measures with the exception of the risk-stratified readmission rate for heart failure. For hospitals that used hospitalists, there was no significant change in any of the outcome measures with increasing percentage of patients admitted by hospitalists.The presence of hospitalists is not an independent predictor of performance on publicly reported mortality and readmissions measures for AMI, HF, or pneumonia. It is likely that broader system or organizational interventions are required to improve performance on patient outcomes.

SUBMITTER: Goodrich K

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3531241 | biostudies-literature | 2012 Jul-Aug

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Hospitalist utilization and hospital performance on 6 publicly reported patient outcomes.

Goodrich Kate K Krumholz Harlan M HM Conway Patrick H PH Lindenauer Peter P Auerbach Andrew D AD

Journal of hospital medicine 20120611 6

<h4>Background</h4>The increase in hospitalist-provided inpatient care may be accompanied by an expectation of improvement on patient outcomes. To date, the association between utilization of hospitalists and the publicly reported patient outcomes is unknown.<h4>Objective</h4>Assess the relationship between hospitalist utilization and performance on 6 publicly reported patient outcomes.<h4>Design</h4>Cross-sectional study.<h4>Participants</h4>Representatives of 598 hospitals in the United States ...[more]

PMID: 22689448

Similar Datasets

Project description:ImportanceThe Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services's (CMS's) 30-day risk-standardized mortality rate (RSMR) and risk-standardized readmission rate (RSRR) models do not adjust for do-not-resuscitate (DNR) status of hospitalized patients and may bias Hospital Readmissions Reduction Program (HRRP) financial penalties and Overall Hospital Quality Star Ratings.ObjectiveTo identify the association between hospital-level DNR prevalence and condition-specific 30-day RSMR and RSRR and the implications of this association for HRRP financial penalty.Design, setting, and participantsThis cross-sectional study obtained patient-level data from the Medicare Limited Data Set Inpatient Standard Analytical File and hospital-level data from the CMS Hospital Compare website for all consecutive Medicare inpatient encounters from July 1, 2015, to June 30, 2018, in 4484 US hospitals. Hospitalized patients had a principal diagnosis of acute myocardial infarction (AMI), heart failure (HF), stroke, pneumonia, or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Incoming acute care transfers, discharges against medical advice, and patients coming from or discharged to hospice were among those excluded from the analysis.ExposuresPresent-on-admission (POA) DNR status was defined as an International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision diagnosis code of V49.86 (before October 1, 2015) or as an International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems, Tenth Revision diagnosis code of Z66 (beginning October 1, 2015). Hospital-level prevalence of POA DNR status was calculated for each of the 5 conditions.Main outcomes and measuresHospital-level 30-day RSMRs and RSRRs for 5 condition-specific cohorts (mortality cohorts: AMI, HF, stroke, pneumonia, and COPD; readmission cohorts: AMI, HF, pneumonia, and COPD) and HRRP financial penalty status (yes or no).ResultsIncluded in the study were 4 884 237 inpatient encounters across condition-specific 30-day mortality cohorts (patient mean [SD] age, 78.8 [8.5] years; 2 608 182 women [53.4%]) and 4 450 378 inpatient encounters across condition-specific 30-day readmission cohorts (patient mean [SD] age, 78.6 [8.5] years; 2 349 799 women [52.8%]). Hospital-level median (interquartile range [IQR]) prevalence of POA DNR status in the mortality cohorts varied: 11% (7%-16%) for AMI, 13% (7%-23%) for HF, 14% (9%-22%) for stroke, 17% (9%-26%) for pneumonia, and 10% (5%-18%) for COPD. For the readmission cohorts, the hospital-level median (IQR) POA DNR prevalence was 9% (6%-15%) for AMI, 12% (6%-22%) for HF, 16% (8%-24%) for pneumonia, and 9% (4%-17%) for COPD. The 30-day RSMRs were significantly higher for hospitals in the highest quintiles vs the lowest quintiles of DNR prevalence (eg, AMI: 12.9 [95% CI, 12.8-13.1] vs 12.5 [95% CI, 12.4-12.7]; P < .001). The inverse was true among the readmission cohorts, with the highest quintiles of DNR prevalence exhibiting the lowest RSRRs (eg, AMI: 15.3 [95% CI, 15.1-15.5] vs 15.9 [95% CI, 15.7-16.0]; P < .001). A 1% absolute increase in risk-adjusted hospital-level DNR prevalence was associated with greater odds of avoiding HRRP financial penalty (odds ratio, 1.06; 95% CI, 1.04-1.08; P < .001).Conclusions and relevanceThis cross-sectional study found that the lack of adjustment in CMS 30-day RSMR and RSRR models for POA DNR status of hospitalized patients may be associated with biased readmission penalization and hospital-level performance.

Project description:Public reporting of quality is considered a key strategy for stimulating improvement efforts at US hospitals; however, little is known about the attitudes of hospital leaders toward existing quality measures.To describe US hospital leaders' attitudes toward hospital quality measures found on the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services' Hospital Compare website, assess use of these measures for quality improvement, and examine the association between leaders' attitudes and hospital quality performance.We mailed a 21-item questionnaire from January 1 through September 31, 2012, to senior hospital leaders from a stratified random sample of 630 US hospitals, including equal numbers with better-than-expected, as-expected, and worse-than-expected performance on mortality and readmission measures.We assessed levels of agreement with statements concerning quality measures, examined use of measures for improvement activities, and analyzed the association between leaders' attitudes and hospital performance.Of 630 hospitals surveyed, 380 (60.3%) responded. For each of the mortality, readmission, process, and patient experience measures, more than 70% of hospitals agreed with the statement that "public reporting stimulates quality improvement activity at my institution"; agreement for measures of cost and volume was 65.2% and 53.3%, respectively. A similar pattern was observed for the statement that "our hospital is able to influence performance on this measure"; agreement for processes of care and patient experience measures was 96.4% and 94.2%, respectively. A total of 89.7% of hospitals agreed that the hospital's reputation was influenced by patient experience measures; agreement was 77.4% for mortality, 69.9% for readmission, 76.3% for process measures, 66.1% for cost measures, and 54.0% for volume measures. A total of 87.1% of hospitals reported incorporating performance on publicly reported measures into their hospital's annual goals, whereas 90.2% reported regularly reviewing the results with the hospital's board of trustees and 94.3% with senior clinical and administrative leaders. When compared with chief executive officers and chief medical officers, respondents who identified themselves as chief quality officers or vice presidents of quality were less likely to agree that public reporting stimulates quality improvement and that measured differences are large enough to differentiate among hospitals.Hospital leaders indicated that the measures reported on the Hospital Compare website exert strong influence over local planning and improvement efforts. However, they expressed concerns about the clinical meaningfulness, unintended consequences, and methods of public reporting.

Project description:ObjectiveTo determine if increases in hospital discharge prices are associated with improvements in clinical quality or patient experience.Data sourcesThis study used Medicare cost report data and publicly available Medicare.gov Care Compare quality measures for approximately 3000 short-term care general hospitals between 2011 and 2018.Study designWe separately regressed quality measure scores on a lag of case mix adjusted discharge price, hospital fixed effects, and year indicators. Clinical quality measures included 30-day readmission rates for acute myocardial infarction, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, heart failure, hip and knee replacement, and pneumonia; risk-adjusted 30-day mortality rates for acute myocardial infarction, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, heart failure, and stroke; and 90-day complication rate for hip and knee replacement. Patient experience measures included the summary star rating and 10 domain measures reported through the Hospital Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems survey. We tested for heterogeneous effects by hospital ownership, number of beds, the commercial share of overall discharges, and market concentration.Data collection/extraction methodsWe linked hospitals identified in Medicare cost reports to Medicare.gov Care Compare quality measures. We excluded hospitals for which we could not identify a discharge price or that had an unrealistic price.Principal findingsThere was no positive association between lagged discharge price and any clinical quality measure. For patient experience measures, a 2% increase in discharge price was not associated with overall patient satisfaction but was associated with small, statistically significant increases ranging from 0.01% to 0.02% (relative to mean scores) for seven of ten domain measures. There was a positive association for five of ten patient experience measures in competitive markets and one measure in both moderately concentrated and heavily concentrated markets.ConclusionsWe found no evidence that hospitals use higher prices to make investments in clinical quality; patient experience improved, but only negligibly.

Project description:ImportanceSurvival rates after in-hospital cardiac arrest (IHCA) vary significantly among US centers; whether this variation is owing to differences in IHCA care quality is unknown.ObjectiveTo evaluate hospital-level variation to determine whether hospital process composite performance measures of IHCA care quality are associated with patient outcomes.Design, setting, and participantsUsing data from the American Heart Association's Get With the Guidelines-Resuscitation (GWTG-R) program, we analyzed 35 283 patients 18 years or older with IHCA treated at 261 US hospitals from January 1, 2010, through December 31, 2012. We calculated the hospital process composite performance score for IHCA using 5 guideline-recommended process measures. Opportunity-based scores were calculated for all patients, aggregated at the hospital level, divided into quartiles, and then associated with risk-standardized survival and neurologic status by a test for trend. The scores were then evaluated through hierarchical logistic regression and reported as odds ratios per 10% increment in hospital process composite performance.InterventionsAcute care treatments for IHCA.Main outcomes and measuresThe primary outcome was survival to discharge measured as risk standard survival rates, and the secondary outcome was favorable neurologic status at hospital discharge.ResultsOf the 35 283 adults included in this study, the median age was 67 years (interquartile range [IQR] 56-78 years), and 57.9% were male. The median IHCA hospital process composite performance was 89.7% (interquartile range, 85.4%-93.1%) and varied among hospital quartiles from 82.6% (lowest) to 94.8% (highest). The IHCA hospital process composite performance was linearly associated with risk-standardized hospital survival to discharge rates: 21.1%, 21.4%, 22.8%, and 23.4% from lowest to highest performance quartiles, respectively (P < .001). After adjustment, each 10% increase in a hospital's process composite performance was associated with a 22% higher odds of survival (adjusted odds ratio, 1.22; 95% CI, 1.08-1.37; P = .01). Hospital process composite quality performance was also associated with favorable neurologic status at discharge (P = .004).Conclusions and relevanceThe quality of guideline-based care for IHCA varies significantly among US hospitals and is associated with patient survival and neurologic outcomes.

Project description:Individuals with hip dysplasia report significant functional disability that improves with periacetabular osteotomy (PAO). Four physical performance measures (PPMs) have been recently validated for use with nonarthritic hip conditions; however, their ability to detect functional improvement and correlate with improvements in popular hip-specific patient-reported outcome (PRO) instruments after PAO is unknown. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the responsiveness of four PPMs up to 1 year after PAO, compare PPMs with established PRO measures at these time points, and report the acceptability and utility of PPMs for assessing outcomes after PAO. Twenty-two participants aged 15 to 39 years completed the timed stair ascent (TSA), sit-to-stand five times (STS5), self-selected walking speed, four-square-step test, and seven hip-specific PRO measures before surgery and at approximately 6 months and 1 year after PAO. They completed questions regarding acceptability and utility of both types of testing. Wilcoxon rank sum test and unpaired Student t-tests were used to assess differences between time points; Spearman correlation and generalized linear modeling were used to determine the relationship between PPMs and PRO measures. Six months after PAO, participants showed significant improvements on all seven PRO instruments (P < 0.001) and on the STS5 (P = 0.01). At one year, these improvements were maintained and TSA also improved (P = 0.03). Improvement in other PPMs did not reach significance (P = 0.07 and 0.08). The STS5 test demonstrated moderate to strong correlation (|r| = 0.43 to 0.76, P < 0.05) with all PRO measures, and the TSA test demonstrated moderate to strong correlation with almost all measures (|r| = 0.43 to 0.58, P < 0.05). Correlations strengthened on subanalysis of participants with unilateral disease (n = 11) (|r| = 0.56 to 0.94, P < 0.05). All participants (100%) found PPM testing acceptable despite disability; 25% preferred PPMs to PRO measures, whereas 75% of participants found them equal in usefulness. The STS5 and TSA tests demonstrated moderate to very strong correlation with PRO measures at six and 12 months after PAO for dysplasia. These tests could be used as a functional outcome to supplement PRO instruments after PAO.

Dataset Information

Hospitalist utilization and hospital performance on 6 publicly reported patient outcomes.

Publications

Hospitalist utilization and hospital performance on 6 publicly reported patient outcomes.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets