Dataset Information

Impact of hospital safety-net status on failure to rescue after major cardiac surgery.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND:Hospitals with safety-net status have been associated with inferior surgical outcomes and higher costs. The mechanism of this discrepancy, however, is not well understood. We hypothesized that discrepant rates of failure to rescue after complications of routine cardiac surgery would explain the observed inferior outcomes at safety-net hospitals. METHODS:The National Inpatient Sample was used to identify adult patients who underwent elective coronary artery bypass grafting and isolated or concomitant valve operations between January 2005 and December 2016. Hospitals were stratified into low-, medium-, or high-burden categories based on the proportion of uninsured or Medicaid patients to emulate safety-net status as defined by the Institute of Medicine. Failure to rescue was defined as mortality after occurrence of neurologic, cardiovascular, respiratory, renal, or infectious complications (major and minor complications). Multivariable regression was used to perform risk-adjusted comparisons of the rate of complications, failures to rescue, and resource use for high-burden hospitals versus low-burden and medium-burden hospitals. RESULTS:Of an estimated 2,012,104 patients undergoing elective major cardiac operations, 2% died, whereas 36% suffered major and minor complications. Safety-net hospitals had higher odds of failure to rescue after major comorbidity (adjusted odds ratio 1.12, 95% confidence interval 1.01-1.23). Occurrence of major and minor complications at safety-net hospitals was associated with increased costs ($2,480 [95% confidence interval $1,178-$3,935]) compared with low-burden hospitals. CONCLUSION:Safety-net hospitals were associated with higher rates of failure to rescue after occurrence of tamponade, septicemia, and respiratory complications. Implementation of care bundles to tackle cardiovascular, respiratory, and renal complications may affect the discrepancy in incidence of and rescue from complications at safety-net institutions.

SUBMITTER: Sanaiha Y

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7700062 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Nov

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Impact of hospital safety-net status on failure to rescue after major cardiac surgery.

Sanaiha Yas Y Rudasill Sarah S Sareh Sohail S Mardock Alexandra A Khoury Habib H Ziaeian Boback B Shemin Richard R Benharash Peyman P

Surgery 20190712 5

<h4>Background</h4>Hospitals with safety-net status have been associated with inferior surgical outcomes and higher costs. The mechanism of this discrepancy, however, is not well understood. We hypothesized that discrepant rates of failure to rescue after complications of routine cardiac surgery would explain the observed inferior outcomes at safety-net hospitals.<h4>Methods</h4>The National Inpatient Sample was used to identify adult patients who underwent elective coronary artery bypass grafti ...[more]

PMID: 31307773

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundRecent observational studies on volume-outcome associations in hepatobiliary surgery were not designed to account for the varying extent of hepatobiliary resections and the consequential risk of perioperative morbidity and mortality. Therefore, this study aimed to determine the risk-adjusted in-hospital mortality for minor and major hepatobiliary resections at the national level in Germany and to examine the effect of hospital volume on in-hospital mortality, and failure to rescue.MethodsAll inpatient cases of hepatobiliary surgery (n = 31,114) in Germany from 2009 to 2015 were studied using national hospital discharge data. After ranking hospitals according to increasing hospital volumes, five volume categories were established based on all hepatobiliary resections. The association between hospital volume and in-hospital mortality following minor and major hepatobiliary resections was evaluated by multivariable regression methods.ResultsMinor hepatobiliary resections were associated with an overall mortality rate of 3.9% and showed no significant volume-outcome associations. In contrast, overall mortality rate of major hepatobiliary resections was 10.3%. In this cohort, risk-adjusted in-hospital mortality following major resections varied widely across hospital volume categories, from 11.4% (95% CI 10.4-12.5) in very low volume hospitals to 7.4% (95% CI 6.6-8.2) in very high volume hospitals (risk-adjusted OR 0.59, 95% CI 0.41-0.54). Moreover, rates of failure to rescue decreased from 29.38% (95% CI 26.7-32.2) in very low volume hospitals to 21.38% (95% CI 19.2-23.8) in very high volume hospitals.ConclusionsIn Germany, patients who are undergoing major hepatobiliary resections have improved outcomes, if they are admitted to higher volume hospitals. However, such associations are not evident following minor hepatobiliary resections. Following major hepatobiliary resections, 70-80% of the excess mortality in very low volume hospitals was estimated to be attributable to failure to rescue.

Project description:ImportanceNo consensus exists on how to define safety-net hospitals (SNHs) for research or policy decision-making. Identifying which types of hospitals are classified as SNHs under different definitions is key to assessing policies that affect SNH funding.ObjectiveTo examine characteristics of SNHs as classified under 3 common definitions.Design, setting, and participantsThis cross-sectional analysis includes noncritical-access hospitals in the Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project State Inpatient Databases from 47 US states for fiscal year 2015, linked to the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services Hospital Cost Reports and to the American Hospital Association Annual Survey. Data were analyzed from March 1 through September 30, 2018.ExposuresHospital characteristics including organizational characteristics, scope of services provided, and financial attributes.Main outcomes and measuresDefinitions of SNH based on Medicaid and Medicare Supplemental Security Income inpatient days historically used to determine Medicare Disproportionate Share Hospital (DSH) payments; Medicaid and uninsured caseload; and uncompensated care costs. For each measure, SNHs were defined as those within the top quartile for each state.ResultsThe 2066 hospitals in this study were distributed across the Northeast (340 [16.5%]), Midwest (587 [28.4%]), South (790 [38.2%]), and West (349 [16.9%]). Concordance between definitions was low; 269 hospitals (13.0%) or fewer were identified as SNHs under any 2 definitions. Uncompensated care captured smaller (200 of 523 [38.2%]) and more rural (65 of 523 [12.4%]) SNHs, whereas DSH index and Medicaid and uncompensated caseload identified SNHs that were larger (264 of 518 [51.0%] and 158 of 487 [32.4%], respectively) and teaching facilities (337 of 518 [65.1%] and 229 of 487 [47.0%], respectively) that provided more essential services than non-SNHs. Uncompensated care also distinguished remarkable financial differences between SNHs and non-SNHs. Under the uncompensated care definition, median (interquartile range [IQR]) bad debt ($27.1 [$15.5-$44.3] vs $12.8 [$6.7-$21.6] per $1000 of operating expenses; P < .001) and charity care ($19.9 [$9.3-$34.1] vs $9.1 [$4.0-$18.7] per $1000 of operating expenses) were twice as high and median (IQR) unreimbursed costs ($32.6 [$12.4-$55.4] vs $23.6 [$9.0-$42.7] per $1000 of operating expenses; P < .001) were 38% higher for SNHs than for non-SNHs. Safety-net hospitals defined by uncompensated care burden had lower median (IQR) total (4.7% [0%-9.9%] vs 5.8% [1.2%-11.2%]; P = .003) and operating (0.3% [-8.0% to 7.2%] vs 2.3% [-3.9% to 8.9%]; P < .001) margins than their non-SNH counterparts, whereas differences between SNH and non-SNH profit margins generally were not statistically significant under the other 2 definitions.Conclusions and relevanceDifferent SNH definitions identify hospitals with different characteristics and financial conditions. The new DSH formula, which accounts for uncompensated care, may lead to redistributed payments across hospitals. Our results may inform which types of hospitals will experience funding changes as DSH payment policies evolve.

Project description:Association of insurance type with colorectal surgical complications, textbook outcomes (TO), and cost in a safety-net hospital (SNH).BackgroundSNHs have higher surgical complications and costs compared to low-burden hospitals. How does presentation acuity and insurance type influence colorectal surgical outcomes?MethodsRetrospective cohort study using single-site National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (2013-2019) with cost data and risk-adjusted by frailty, preoperative serious acute conditions (PASC), case status and open versus laparoscopic to evaluate 30-day reoperations, any complication, Clavien-Dindo IV (CDIV) complications, TO, and hospitalization variable costs.ResultsCases (Private 252; Medicare 207; Medicaid/Uninsured 619) with patient mean age 55.2 years (SD = 13.4) and 53.1% male. Adjusting for frailty, open abdomen, and urgent/emergent cases, Medicaid/Uninsured patients had higher odds of presenting with PASC (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] = 2.02, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.22-3.52, P = 0.009) versus Private. Medicaid/Uninsured (aOR = 1.80, 95% CI = 1.28-2.55, P < 0.001) patients were more likely to undergo urgent/emergent surgeries compared to Private. Medicare patients had increased odds of any and CDIV complications while Medicaid/Uninsured had increased odds of any complication, emergency department or observations stays, and readmissions versus Private. Medicare (aOR = 0.51, 95% CI = 0.33-0.88, P = 0.003) and Medicaid/Uninsured (aOR = 0.43, 95% CI = 0.30-0.60, P < 0.001) patients had lower odds of achieving TO versus Private. Variable cost %change increased in Medicaid/Uninsured patients to 13.94% (P = 0.005) versus Private but was similar after adjusting for case status. Urgent/emergent cases (43.23%, P < 0.001) and any complication (78.34%, P < 0.001) increased %change hospitalization costs.ConclusionsDecreasing the incidence of urgent/emergent colorectal surgeries, possibly by improving access to care, could have a greater impact on improving clinical outcomes and decreasing costs, especially in Medicaid/Uninsured insurance type patients.

Project description:ImportanceThe Hospital-Acquired Condition Reduction Program (HACRP) evaluates acute care hospitals on the occurrence of patient safety events and health care-associated infections. Since its implementation, several studies have raised concerns about the overpenalization of teaching and safety-net hospitals, and although several changes in the program's methodology have been applied in the last few years, whether these changes reversed the overpenalization of teaching and safety-net hospitals is unknown.ObjectiveTo determine hospital characteristics associated with HACRP penalization and penalization reversal.Design, setting, and participantsThis retrospective cross-sectional study assessed data from 3117 acute care hospitals participating in the HACRP. The HACRP penalization and hospital characteristics were obtained from Hospital Compare (2020 and 2021), the Inpatient Prospective Payment System impact file (2020), and the American Hospital Association annual survey (2018).ExposuresHospital characteristics, including safety-net status and teaching intensity (no teaching and very minor, minor, major, and very major teaching levels).Main outcomes and measuresThe primary outcome was HACRP penalization (ie, hospitals that fell within the worst quartile of the program's performance). Multivariable models initially included all covariates, and then backward stepwise variable selection was used.ResultsOf 3117 hospitals that participated in HACRP in 2020, 779 (25.0%) were safety-net hospitals and 1090 (35.0%) were teaching institutions. In total, 771 hospitals (24.7%) were penalized. The HACRP penalization was associated with safety-net status (odds ratio [OR], 1.41 [95% CI, 1.16-1.71]) and very major teaching intensity (OR, 1.94 [95% CI, 1.15-3.28]). In addition, non-federal government hospitals were more likely to be penalized than for-profit hospitals (OR, 1.62 [95% CI, 1.23-2.14]), as were level I trauma centers (OR, 2.05 [95% CI, 1.43-2.96]) and hospitals located in the New England region (OR, 1.65 [95% CI, 1.12-2.43]). Safety-net hospitals with major teaching levels were twice as likely to be penalized as non-safety-net nonteaching hospitals (OR, 2.15 [95% CI, 1.14-4.03]). Furthermore, safety-net hospitals penalized in 2020 were less likely (OR, 0.64 [95% CI, 0.43-0.96]) to revert their HACRP penalization status in 2021.Conclusions and relevanceFindings from this cross-sectional study indicated that teaching and safety-net hospital status continued to be associated with overpenalization in the HACRP despite recent changes in its methodology. Most of these hospitals were also less likely to revert their penalization status. A reevaluation of the program methodology is needed to avoid depleting resources of hospitals caring for underserved populations.

Dataset Information

Impact of hospital safety-net status on failure to rescue after major cardiac surgery.

Publications

Impact of hospital safety-net status on failure to rescue after major cardiac surgery.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets