Relationship Between In-Hospital Adverse Events and Hospital Performance on 30-Day All-cause Mortality and Readmission for Patients With Heart Failure.

IF 6.9 2区 医学
Yun Wang, Noel Eldridge, Mark L Metersky, David Rodrick, Sheila Eckenrode, Jasie Mathew, Deron H Galusha, Andrea A Peterson, David Hunt, Sharon-Lise T Normand, Harlan M Krumholz
{"title":"Relationship Between In-Hospital Adverse Events and Hospital Performance on 30-Day All-cause Mortality and Readmission for Patients With Heart Failure.","authors":"Yun Wang, Noel Eldridge, Mark L Metersky, David Rodrick, Sheila Eckenrode, Jasie Mathew, Deron H Galusha, Andrea A Peterson, David Hunt, Sharon-Lise T Normand, Harlan M Krumholz","doi":"10.1161/CIRCOUTCOMES.122.009573","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Hospitals with high mortality and readmission rates for patients with heart failure (HF) might also perform poorly in other quality concepts. We sought to evaluate the association between hospital performance on mortality and readmission with hospital performance rates of safety adverse events.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This cross-sectional study linked the 2009 to 2019 patient-level adverse events data from the Medicare Patient Safety Monitoring System, a randomly selected medical records-abstracted patient safety database, to the 2005 to 2016 hospital-level HF-specific 30-day all-cause mortality and readmissions data from the United States Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services. Hospitals were classified to one of 3 performance categories based on their risk-standardized 30-day all-cause mortality and readmission rates: better (both in <25th percentile), worse (both >75th percentile), and average (otherwise). Our main outcome was the occurrence (yes/no) of one or more adverse events during hospitalization. A mixed-effect model was fit to assess the relationship between a patient's risk of having adverse events and hospital performance categories, adjusted for patient and hospital characteristics.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The study included 39 597 patients with HF from 3108 hospitals, of which 252 hospitals (8.1%) and 215 (6.9%) were in the better and worse categories, respectively. The rate of patients with one or more adverse events during a hospitalization was 12.5% (95% CI, 12.1-12.8). Compared with patients admitted to better hospitals, patients admitted to worse hospitals had a higher risk of one or more hospital-acquired adverse events (adjusted risk ratio, 1.24 [95% CI, 1.06-1.44]).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Patients admitted with HF to hospitals with high 30-day all-cause mortality and readmission rates had a higher risk of in-hospital adverse events. There may be common quality issues among these 3 measure concepts in these hospitals that produce poor performance for patients with HF.</p>","PeriodicalId":10301,"journal":{"name":"Circulation. Cardiovascular Quality and Outcomes","volume":"16 7","pages":"e009573"},"PeriodicalIF":6.9000,"publicationDate":"2023-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10351904/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Circulation. Cardiovascular Quality and Outcomes","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1161/CIRCOUTCOMES.122.009573","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/7/18 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Hospitals with high mortality and readmission rates for patients with heart failure (HF) might also perform poorly in other quality concepts. We sought to evaluate the association between hospital performance on mortality and readmission with hospital performance rates of safety adverse events.

Methods: This cross-sectional study linked the 2009 to 2019 patient-level adverse events data from the Medicare Patient Safety Monitoring System, a randomly selected medical records-abstracted patient safety database, to the 2005 to 2016 hospital-level HF-specific 30-day all-cause mortality and readmissions data from the United States Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services. Hospitals were classified to one of 3 performance categories based on their risk-standardized 30-day all-cause mortality and readmission rates: better (both in <25th percentile), worse (both >75th percentile), and average (otherwise). Our main outcome was the occurrence (yes/no) of one or more adverse events during hospitalization. A mixed-effect model was fit to assess the relationship between a patient's risk of having adverse events and hospital performance categories, adjusted for patient and hospital characteristics.

Results: The study included 39 597 patients with HF from 3108 hospitals, of which 252 hospitals (8.1%) and 215 (6.9%) were in the better and worse categories, respectively. The rate of patients with one or more adverse events during a hospitalization was 12.5% (95% CI, 12.1-12.8). Compared with patients admitted to better hospitals, patients admitted to worse hospitals had a higher risk of one or more hospital-acquired adverse events (adjusted risk ratio, 1.24 [95% CI, 1.06-1.44]).

Conclusions: Patients admitted with HF to hospitals with high 30-day all-cause mortality and readmission rates had a higher risk of in-hospital adverse events. There may be common quality issues among these 3 measure concepts in these hospitals that produce poor performance for patients with HF.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

院内不良事件与医院在心衰患者 30 天内全因死亡率和再入院率方面的表现之间的关系。
背景:心力衰竭(HF)患者死亡率和再入院率高的医院可能在其他质量概念方面也表现不佳。我们试图评估医院在死亡率和再入院率方面的表现与医院在安全不良事件方面的表现之间的关联:这项横断面研究将美国医疗保险与医疗补助服务中心(Medicare & Medicaid Services)随机抽取的病历摘要患者安全数据库--医疗保险患者安全监测系统(Medicare Patient Safety Monitoring System)中的 2009 年至 2019 年患者级不良事件数据,与 2005 年至 2016 年医院级心力衰竭 30 天全因死亡率和再入院率数据联系起来。根据医院的风险标准化 30 天全因死亡率和再入院率,将医院分为 3 个绩效类别:较好(均在第 75 百分位)和一般(其他)。我们的主要结果是住院期间发生一次或多次不良事件(是/否)。在对患者和医院特征进行调整后,我们建立了一个混合效应模型来评估患者发生不良事件的风险与医院绩效类别之间的关系:研究纳入了 3108 家医院的 39 597 名心房颤动患者,其中较好和较差的医院分别为 252 家(8.1%)和 215 家(6.9%)。住院期间发生一次或多次不良事件的患者比例为 12.5%(95% CI,12.1-12.8)。与入住较好医院的患者相比,入住较差医院的患者发生一次或多次院内不良事件的风险更高(调整后风险比为1.24 [95% CI, 1.06-1.44]):结论:在30天全因死亡率和再入院率较高的医院住院的高血压患者发生院内不良事件的风险较高。在这些医院中,这三个测量概念可能存在共同的质量问题,导致心房颤动患者的治疗效果不佳。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Circulation. Cardiovascular Quality and Outcomes
Circulation. Cardiovascular Quality and Outcomes Medicine-Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine
CiteScore
9.80
自引率
2.90%
发文量
357
期刊介绍: Circulation: Cardiovascular Quality and Outcomes, an American Heart Association journal, publishes articles related to improving cardiovascular health and health care. Content includes original research, reviews, and case studies relevant to clinical decision-making and healthcare policy. The online-only journal is dedicated to furthering the mission of promoting safe, effective, efficient, equitable, timely, and patient-centered care. Through its articles and contributions, the journal equips you with the knowledge you need to improve clinical care and population health, and allows you to engage in scholarly activities of consequence to the health of the public. Circulation: Cardiovascular Quality and Outcomes considers the following types of articles: Original Research Articles, Data Reports, Methods Papers, Cardiovascular Perspectives, Care Innovations, Novel Statistical Methods, Policy Briefs, Data Visualizations, and Caregiver or Patient Viewpoints.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信