Dataset Information

Variation of Thyroidectomy-Specific Outcomes Among Hospitals and Their Association With Risk Adjustment and Hospital Performance.

ABSTRACT: Importance:Current surgical quality metrics might be insufficient to fully judge the quality of certain operations because they are not procedure specific. Hypocalcemia, recurrent laryngeal nerve (RLN) injury, and hematoma are considered to be the most relevant outcomes to measure after thyroidectomy. Whether these outcomes can be used as hospital quality metrics is unknown. Objectives:To evaluate whether thyroidectomy-specific outcomes vary among hospitals, whether the addition of thyroidectomy-specific variables affects risk adjustment, and whether differences in hospital performance are associated with thyroidectomy-specific care processes. Design, Setting, and Participants:In this retrospective cohort study, patients undergoing thyroidectomies from January 1, 2013, through December 31, 2015, at hospitals participating in the American College of Surgeons' National Surgical Quality Improvement Program were studied. Exposure:Thyroidectomy-related care. Main Outcomes and Measures:Clinically severe hypocalcemia, RLN injury, and clinically significant hematoma within 30 days of thyroid surgery and hospital-level performance variation, change in risk adjustment, and association with processes. Results:Overall, 14 540 patients (mean [SD] age, 52.1 [15.0] years; 11 499 [79.1%] female) underwent operations at 98 hospitals. Because operations missing thyroidectomy-specific outcomes were excluded, the numbers of operations and hospitals analyzed differed by outcome. Of 14 540 operations included, clinically severe hypocalcemia occurred in 450 patients (3.3% overall, 0.6% after partial, and 4.7% after subtotal or total thyroidectomy), RLN injury in 755 patients (5.7% overall, 4.2% after partial, and 6.6% after subtotal or total thyroidectomy), and hematoma in 175 patients (1.3%). Hospital performance varied for hypocalcemia and RLN injury but not for hematoma. Hospital performance rankings were largely unaffected by the inclusion of thyroidectomy-specific data in risk adjustment. With regard to processes, patients undergoing thyroidectomies at the best-performing vs worst-performing hospitals less frequently had their postoperative parathyroid hormone level measured (593 [19.9%] vs 457 [31.7%], P < .001) and more often were prescribed oral calcium, vitamin D, or both (2281 [76.6%] vs 962 [66.8%], P < .001). When profiled by RLN injury, use of energy devices (1517 [69.1%] vs 507 [55.2%], P < .001) and intraoperative nerve monitoring (1223 [55.7%] vs 346 [37.7%], P < .001) were more prevalent at the best- compared with the worst-performing hospitals. Conclusions and Relevance:Postoperative hypocalcemia and RLN injury, but not hematoma, potentially could be used as thyroidectomy-specific national hospital quality improvement metrics. Strategies aimed at reducing these complications after thyroidectomy may improve the care of these patients.

SUBMITTER: Liu JB

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5833609 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND:The conceptualization of hospital quality indicators usually includes some form of risk adjustment to account for hospital differences in case mix. For binary outcome variables like in-hospital mortality, frequently utilized risk adjusted measures include the standardized mortality ratio (SMR), the risk standardized mortality rate (RSMR), and excess risk (ER). All of these measures require the estimation of expected hospital mortality, which is often based on logistic regression models. In this context, an issue that is often neglected is correlation between hospital performance (e.g. care quality) and patient-specific risk factors. The objective of this study was to investigate the impact of such correlation on the adequacy of hospital rankings based on different measures and methods. METHODS:Using Monte Carlo simulation, the impact of correlation between hospital care quality and patient-specific risk factors on the adequacy of hospital rankings was assessed for SMR/RSMR, and ER based on logistic regression and random effects logistic regression. As an alternative method, fixed effects logistic regression with Firth correction was considered. The adequacies of the resulting hospital rankings were assessed by the shares of hospitals correctly classified into quintiles according to their true (unobserved) care qualities. RESULTS:The performance of risk adjustment approaches based on logistic regression and random effects logistic regression declined when correlation between care quality and a risk factor was induced. In contrast, fixed-effects-based estimations proved to be more robust. This was particularly true for fixed-effects-logistic-regression-based ER. In the absence of correlation between risk factors and care quality, all approaches showed similar performance. CONCLUSIONS:Correlation between risk factors and hospital performance may severely bias hospital rankings based on logistic regression and random effects logistic regression. ER based on fixed effects logistic regression with Firth correction should be considered as an alternative approach to assess hospital performance.

Project description:BackgroundDespite numerous studies of geographic variation in healthcare cost and utilization at the local, regional, and state levels across the U.S., a comprehensive characterization of geographic variation in outcomes has not been published. Our objective was to quantify variation in US health outcomes in an all-payer population before and after risk-adjustment.Methods and findingsWe used information from 16 independent data sources, including 22 million all-payer inpatient admissions from the Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project (which covers regions where 50% of the U.S. population lives) to analyze 24 inpatient mortality, inpatient safety, and prevention outcomes. We compared outcome variation at state, hospital referral region, hospital service area, county, and hospital levels. Risk-adjusted outcomes were calculated after adjusting for population factors, co-morbidities, and health system factors. Even after risk-adjustment, there exists large geographical variation in outcomes. The variation in healthcare outcomes exceeds the well publicized variation in US healthcare costs. On average, we observed a 2.1-fold difference in risk-adjusted mortality outcomes between top- and bottom-decile hospitals. For example, we observed a 2.3-fold difference for risk-adjusted acute myocardial infarction inpatient mortality. On average a 10.2-fold difference in risk-adjusted patient safety outcomes exists between top and bottom-decile hospitals, including an 18.3-fold difference for risk-adjusted Central Venous Catheter Bloodstream Infection rates. A 3.0-fold difference in prevention outcomes exists between top- and bottom-decile counties on average; including a 2.2-fold difference for risk-adjusted congestive heart failure admission rates. The population, co-morbidity, and health system factors accounted for a range of R2 between 18-64% of variability in mortality outcomes, 3-39% of variability in patient safety outcomes, and 22-70% of variability in prevention outcomes.ConclusionThe amount of variability in health outcomes in the U.S. is large even after accounting for differences in population, co-morbidities, and health system factors. These findings suggest that: 1) additional examination of regional and local variation in risk-adjusted outcomes should be a priority; 2) assumptions of uniform hospital quality that underpin rationale for policy choices (such as narrow insurance networks or antitrust enforcement) should be challenged; and 3) there exists substantial opportunity for outcomes improvement in the US healthcare system.

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.

Dataset Information

Variation of Thyroidectomy-Specific Outcomes Among Hospitals and Their Association With Risk Adjustment and Hospital Performance.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets