Dataset Information

The Limited Utility of Ranking Hospitals Based on Their Colon Surgery Infection Rates.

ABSTRACT:

Background

The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) use colon surgical site infection (SSI) rates to rank hospitals and apply financial penalties. The CMS' risk-adjustment model omits potentially impactful variables that might disadvantage hospitals with complex surgical populations.

Methods

We analyzed adult patients who underwent colon surgery within facilities associated with HCA Healthcare from 2014 to 2016. SSIs were identified from National Health Safety Network (NHSN) reporting. We trained and validated 3 SSI prediction models, using (1) current CMS model variables, including hospital-specific random effects (HCA-adapted CMS model); (2) demographics and claims-based comorbidities (expanded-claims model); and (3) demographics, claims-based comorbidities, and NHSN variables (claims-plus-electronic health record [EHR] model). Discrimination, calibration, and resulting rankings were compared among all models and the current CMS model with published coefficient values.

Results

We identified 39 468 colon surgeries in 149 hospitals, resulting in 1216 (3.1%) SSIs. Compared to the HCA-adapted CMS model, the expanded-claims model had similar performance (c-statistic, 0.65 vs 0.67, respectively), while the claims-plus-EHR model was more accurate (c-statistic, 0.70; 95% confidence interval, .67-.73; P?=?.004). The sampling variation, due to the low surgical volume and small number of infections, contributed 74% of the total variation in observed SSI rates between hospitals. When CMS model rankings were compared to those from the expanded-claims and claims-plus-EHR models, 18 (15%) and 26 (22%) hospitals changed quartiles, respectively, and 10 (8.3%) and 12 (10%) hospitals changed into or out of the lowest-performing quartile, respectively.

Conclusions

An expanded set of variables improved colon SSI risk predictions and quartile assignments, but low procedure volumes and SSI events remain a barrier to effectively comparing hospitals.

SUBMITTER: Caroff DA

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7823072 | biostudies-literature | 2021 Jan

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

The Limited Utility of Ranking Hospitals Based on Their Colon Surgery Infection Rates.

Caroff Daniel A DA Wang Rui R Zhang Zilu Z Wolf Robert R Septimus Ed E Harris Anthony D AD Jackson Sarah S SS Poland Russell E RE Hickok Jason J Huang Susan S SS Platt Richard R

Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America 20210101 1

<h4>Background</h4>The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) use colon surgical site infection (SSI) rates to rank hospitals and apply financial penalties. The CMS' risk-adjustment model omits potentially impactful variables that might disadvantage hospitals with complex surgical populations.<h4>Methods</h4>We analyzed adult patients who underwent colon surgery within facilities associated with HCA Healthcare from 2014 to 2016. SSIs were identified from National Health Safety Network ...[more]

PMID: 31918439

Similar Datasets

Project description:ImportanceIncreasing regionalization of cancer surgery has the inadvertent potential to lead to fragmentation of care if readmissions occur at a facility other than the index hospital. The magnitude and adverse effects of readmission to a facility other than the one where the surgery was performed are unclear.ObjectivesTo assess rates of readmission to nonindex hospitals after major cancer surgery and to compare outcomes between index and nonindex hospital readmissions.Design, setting, and participantsIn this multicenter, population-based, nationally representative study of adult patients undergoing a major cancer operation (defined as esophagectomies or gastrectomies, hepaticobiliary resections, pancreatectomies, colorectal resections, or cystectomies), retrospective analyses were performed using the Nationwide Readmissions Database (admissions from January 1 through September 30, 2013). Descriptive analyses were performed to determine 90-day readmission characteristics, including timing, cost, and outcomes. Adjusting for clustering by facility, the study used multivariate logistic regression to identify factors associated with nonindex vs index readmissions. The study also used regression models to identify differences in mortality, major complications, and subsequent readmissions between the 2 groups. Data analysis was performed from January 1 through December 31, 2013.ExposuresReadmission to index vs nonindex hospitals (defined as any hospital other than the hospital where the major cancer operation was performed).Main outcomes and measuresProportion of 90-day readmissions and nonindex readmissions after major cancer surgery, factors associated with nonindex readmissions, and difference between in-hospital mortality, hospital costs, and subsequent readmissions for patients admitted to index vs nonindex hospitals.ResultsA total of 60 970 patients were included in the study (mean [SD] age, 67 [13] years; 7619 [55.6%] male and 6075 [44.4%] female). The 90-day readmission rate was 23.0%. Of the 13 695 first readmissions, 20.1% were to a nonindex hospital. Independent factors associated with readmission to a nonindex hospital included type of procedure, comorbidities (OR, 1.40; 95% CI, 1.15-1.70), elective admission (OR, 1.21; 95% CI, 1.06-1.37), discharge to a nursing facility (OR, 1.20; 95% CI, 1.07-1.36), and surgery at a teaching hospital (OR, 1.16; 95% CI, 1.00-1.34) (all P < .05). After risk adjustment, patients readmitted to nonindex hospitals had 31.2% higher odds of mortality (odds ratio, 1.31; 95% CI, 1.05-1.64) and 27.3% higher odds of having a major complication (odds ratio, 1.27; 95% CI, 1.14-1.42). Subsequent readmissions and hospital costs were not different between the 2 groups.Conclusions and relevanceApproximately one-fifth of readmissions were to a nonindex hospital and were associated with higher mortality and morbidity than readmission to index hospitals. Factors that influence nonindex readmissions have been identified to target interventions.

Project description:ImportanceIn the US, federal value-based incentive programs are more likely to penalize safety-net institutions than non-safety-net institutions. Whether these programs differentially change the rates of targeted health care-associated infections in safety-net vs non-safety-net hospitals is unknown.ObjectiveTo assess the association of Hospital-Acquired Condition Reduction Program (HACRP) and Hospital Value-Based Purchasing (HVBP) implementation with changes in rates of targeted health care-associated infections and disparities in rates among safety-net and non-safety-net hospitals.Design, setting, and participantsThis interrupted time series included all US acute care hospitals enrolled in the Preventing Avoidable Infectious Complications by Adjusting Payment study that participated in mandatory reporting to the National Healthcare Safety Network from January 1, 2013, through June 30, 2018. Hospital characteristics were obtained from the 2015 American Hospital Association annual survey. Penalty statuses for 2015 to 2018 were obtained from Hospital Compare. Data were analyzed between July 9, 2018, and October 1, 2019.ExposuresHACRP and HVBP implementation in fiscal year 2015 or 2016.Main outcomes and measuresThe primary outcomes were rates of 4 health care-associated infections: central line-associated bloodstream infection (CLABSI), catheter-associated urinary tract infection (CAUTI), surgical site infection (SSI) after colon surgical procedures, and SSI after abdominal hysterectomy procedures. Regression models were fit using generalized estimating equations to assess the association of HACRP and HVBP implementation with health care-associated infection rates and disparities in infection rates.ResultsOf the 618 acute care hospitals included in this study, 473 (76.5%) were non-safety net and 145 (23.5%) were considered safety net. In these hospitals, HACRP and HVBP implementation was not associated with improvements in level or trend for any health care-associated infection examined (eg, CAUTI in safety-net hospitals: incidence rate ratio [IRR] for level change, 0.98 [95% CI, 0.79-1.23; P = .89]; IRR for change in slope, 1.00 [95% CI, 0.97-1.03; P = .80]). Before program implementation, infection rates were statistically significantly higher for safety-net than for non-safety-net hospitals for CLABSI (IRR, 1.23; 95% CI, 1.07-1.42; P = .004), CAUTI (IRR, 1.38; 95% CI, 1.16-1.64; P < .001), and SSI after colon surgical procedure (odds ratio [OR], 1.26; 95% CI, 1.06-1.50; P = .009). The disparity persisted over time when comparing the last year of the study with the first year (CLABSI: ratio of ratios [ROR], 0.93 [95% CI, 0.77-1.13; P = .48]; CAUTI: ROR, 0.90 [95% CI, 0.73-1.10; P = .31]; SSI after colon surgical procedures: ROR, 0.96 [95% CI, 0.78-1.20; P = .75]). Rates of SSI after abdominal hysterectomy procedure were similar in safety-net and non-safety-net hospitals before implementation (OR, 1.13; 95% CI, 0.91-1.40; P = .27) but higher after implementation (OR, 1.43; 95% CI, 1.11-1.83; P = .006), although this change was not significant (ROR, 1.20; 95% CI, 0.91-1.59; P = .20).Conclusions and relevanceThis study found that HACRP and HVBP implementation was not associated with any improvements in targeted health care-associated infections among safety-net or non-safety-net hospitals or with changes in disparities in infection rates. Given the persistent health care-associated infection rate disparities, these programs appear to function as a disproportionate penalty system for safety-net hospitals that offer no measurable benefits for patients.

Dataset Information

The Limited Utility of Ranking Hospitals Based on Their Colon Surgery Infection Rates.

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

The Limited Utility of Ranking Hospitals Based on Their Colon Surgery Infection Rates.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets