Dataset Information

Risk-standardizing survival for in-hospital cardiac arrest to facilitate hospital comparisons.

ABSTRACT: The purpose of this study is to develop a method for risk-standardizing hospital survival after cardiac arrest.A foundation with which hospitals can improve quality is to be able to benchmark their risk-adjusted performance against other hospitals, something that cannot currently be done for survival after in-hospital cardiac arrest.Within the Get With The Guidelines (GWTG)-Resuscitation registry, we identified 48,841 patients admitted between 2007 and 2010 with an in-hospital cardiac arrest. Using hierarchical logistic regression, we derived and validated a model for survival to hospital discharge and calculated risk-standardized survival rates (RSSRs) for 272 hospitals with at least 10 cardiac arrest cases.The survival rate was 21.0% and 21.2% for the derivation and validation cohorts, respectively. The model had good discrimination (C-statistic 0.74) and excellent calibration. Eighteen variables were associated with survival to discharge, and a parsimonious model contained 9 variables with minimal change in model discrimination. Before risk adjustment, the median hospital survival rate was 20% (interquartile range: 14% to 26%), with a wide range (0% to 85%). After adjustment, the distribution of RSSRs was substantially narrower: median of 21% (interquartile range: 19% to 23%; range 11% to 35%). More than half (143 [52.6%]) of hospitals had at least a 10% positive or negative absolute change in percentile rank after risk standardization, and 50 (23.2%) had a ?20% absolute change in percentile rank.We have derived and validated a model to risk-standardize hospital rates of survival for in-hospital cardiac arrest. Use of this model can support efforts to compare hospitals in resuscitation outcomes as a foundation for quality assessment and improvement.

SUBMITTER: Chan PS

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3769937 | biostudies-literature | 2013 Aug

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Risk-standardizing survival for in-hospital cardiac arrest to facilitate hospital comparisons.

Chan Paul S PS Berg Robert A RA Spertus John A JA Schwamm Lee H LH Bhatt Deepak L DL Fonarow Gregg C GC Heidenreich Paul A PA Nallamothu Brahmajee K BK Tang Fengming F Merchant Raina M RM

Journal of the American College of Cardiology 20130613 7

<h4>Objectives</h4>The purpose of this study is to develop a method for risk-standardizing hospital survival after cardiac arrest.<h4>Background</h4>A foundation with which hospitals can improve quality is to be able to benchmark their risk-adjusted performance against other hospitals, something that cannot currently be done for survival after in-hospital cardiac arrest.<h4>Methods</h4>Within the Get With The Guidelines (GWTG)-Resuscitation registry, we identified 48,841 patients admitted betwee ...[more]

PMID: 23770167

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundA hospital's risk-standardized survival rate (RSSR) for in-hospital cardiac arrest has emerged as an important metric to benchmark and incentivize hospital resuscitation quality. We examined whether hospital performance on the RSSR metric was stable or dynamic year-over-year and whether low-performing hospitals were able to improve survival outcomes over time.Methods and resultsWe used data from 84 089 adult patients with an in-hospital cardiac arrest from 166 hospitals with continuous participation in Get With The Guidelines-Resuscitation from 2012 to 2017. A 2-level hierarchical regression model was used to compute RSSRs during a baseline (2012-2013) and two follow-up periods (2014-2015 and 2016-2017). At baseline, hospitals were classified as top-, middle-, and bottom-performing if they ranked in the top 25%, middle 50%, and bottom 25%, respectively, on their RSSR metric during 2012 to 2013. We compared hospital performance on RSSR during follow-up between top, middle, and bottom-performing hospitals' at baseline. During 2012 to 2013, 42 hospitals were identified as top-performing (median RSSR, 31.7%), 82 as middle-performing (median RSSR, 24.6%), and 42 as bottom-performing (median RSSR, 18.7%). During both follow-up periods, >70% of top-performing hospitals ranked in the top 50%, a substantial proportion remained in the top 25% of RSSR during 2014 to 2015 (54.6%) and 2016 to 2017 (40.4%) follow-up periods. Likewise, nearly 75% of bottom-performing hospitals remained in the bottom 50% during both follow-up periods, with 50.0% in the bottom 25% of RSSR during 2014 to 2015 and 40.5% in the bottom 25% during 2016 to 2017. While percentile rankings were generally consistent over time at ≈45% of study hospitals, ≈1 in 5 (21.4%) bottom-performing hospitals showed large improvement in percentile rankings over time and a similar proportion (23.7%) of top-performing hospitals showed large decline in percentile rankings compared with baseline.ConclusionsHospital performance on RSSR during baseline period was generally consistent over 4 years of follow-up. However, 1 in 5 bottom-performing hospitals had large improvement in survival over time. Identifying care and quality improvement innovations at these sites may provide opportunities to improve in-hospital cardiac arrest care at other hospitals.

Project description:ObjectivesThe objective of this study was to associate ventilation rates during in-hospital cardiopulmonary resuscitation with 1) arterial blood pressure during cardiopulmonary resuscitation and 2) survival outcomes.DesignProspective, multicenter observational study.SettingPediatric and pediatric cardiac ICUs of the Collaborative Pediatric Critical Care Research Network.PatientsIntubated children (≥ 37 wk gestation and < 19 yr old) who received at least 1 minute of cardiopulmonary resuscitation.InterventionsNone.Measurements and main resultsArterial blood pressure and ventilation rate (breaths/min) were manually extracted from arterial line and capnogram waveforms. Guideline rate was defined as 10 ± 2 breaths/min; high ventilation rate as greater than or equal to 30 breaths/min in children less than 1 year old, and greater than or equal to 25 breaths/min in older children. The primary outcome was survival to hospital discharge. Regression models using Firth penalized likelihood assessed the association between ventilation rates and outcomes. Ventilation rates were available for 52 events (47 patients). More than half of patients (30/47; 64%) were less than 1 year old. Eighteen patients (38%) survived to discharge. Median event-level average ventilation rate was 29.8 breaths/min (interquartile range, 23.8-35.7). No event-level average ventilation rate was within guidelines; 30 events (58%) had high ventilation rates. The only significant association between ventilation rate and arterial blood pressure occurred in children 1 year old or older and was present for systolic blood pressure only (-17.8 mm Hg/10 breaths/min; 95% CI, -27.6 to -8.1; p < 0.01). High ventilation rates were associated with a higher odds of survival to discharge (odds ratio, 4.73; p = 0.029). This association was stable after individually controlling for location (adjusted odds ratio, 5.97; p = 0.022), initial rhythm (adjusted odds ratio, 3.87; p = 0.066), and time of day (adjusted odds ratio, 4.12; p = 0.049).ConclusionsIn this multicenter cohort, ventilation rates exceeding guidelines were common. Among the range of rates delivered, higher rates were associated with improved survival to hospital discharge.

Dataset Information

Risk-standardizing survival for in-hospital cardiac arrest to facilitate hospital comparisons.

Publications

Risk-standardizing survival for in-hospital cardiac arrest to facilitate hospital comparisons.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets