使用多元匹配对医院进行分级。

IF 2.8 2区 医学 Q1 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
Jeffrey H Silber, Paul R Rosenbaum, Joseph G Reiter, Omar I Ramadan, Siddharth Jain, Alexander S Hill, Katherine Brumberg, Lee A Fleisher
{"title":"使用多元匹配对医院进行分级。","authors":"Jeffrey H Silber, Paul R Rosenbaum, Joseph G Reiter, Omar I Ramadan, Siddharth Jain, Alexander S Hill, Katherine Brumberg, Lee A Fleisher","doi":"10.1097/MLR.0000000000002188","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background and objectives: </strong>To improve upon existing hospital grading systems, we developed a new report card based on multivariate matching.</p><p><strong>Research design: </strong>Matched cohorts. For each focal hospital patient, we match 10 control patients treated at \"well-resourced\" hospitals with excellent hospital characteristics from across the nation, and 10 control patients treated at \"typical\" hospitals, on over 300 patient characteristics from Medicare Claims. Grades were based on outcome differences between patients at the focal hospital and their matched controls. We also create an \"Analogous\" match that is comprised of multiple control patients matched to each focal hospital patient with similar patient characteristics who were treated at hospitals with similar characteristics to the focal hospital, answering the question, \"How would patients who looked like my patients and who were treated at hospitals like my hospital fare, compared to how my patients fared.\" We also report outcomes by multimorbidity status.</p><p><strong>Subjects: </strong>Medicare admissions from 2017 to 2019 for heart attack, heart failure and pneumonia. To illustrate our methods, we report on 4 hospitals in the same region: a well-known \"Flagship\" teaching Hospital, an Affiliated Hospital within the same flagship system, a Poor-Performing Hospital that is not part of the flagship system, and a Small Hospital with unstable estimates.</p><p><strong>Measures: </strong>Thirty-day mortality and revisit rates.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Report cards for each example hospital.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Matched report cards allow users to better benchmark hospitals and see those types of patients where a specific hospital is performing poorly compared to other hospitals treating very similar patients.</p>","PeriodicalId":18364,"journal":{"name":"Medical Care","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Grading Hospitals Using Multivariate Matching.\",\"authors\":\"Jeffrey H Silber, Paul R Rosenbaum, Joseph G Reiter, Omar I Ramadan, Siddharth Jain, Alexander S Hill, Katherine Brumberg, Lee A Fleisher\",\"doi\":\"10.1097/MLR.0000000000002188\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background and objectives: </strong>To improve upon existing hospital grading systems, we developed a new report card based on multivariate matching.</p><p><strong>Research design: </strong>Matched cohorts. For each focal hospital patient, we match 10 control patients treated at \\\"well-resourced\\\" hospitals with excellent hospital characteristics from across the nation, and 10 control patients treated at \\\"typical\\\" hospitals, on over 300 patient characteristics from Medicare Claims. Grades were based on outcome differences between patients at the focal hospital and their matched controls. We also create an \\\"Analogous\\\" match that is comprised of multiple control patients matched to each focal hospital patient with similar patient characteristics who were treated at hospitals with similar characteristics to the focal hospital, answering the question, \\\"How would patients who looked like my patients and who were treated at hospitals like my hospital fare, compared to how my patients fared.\\\" We also report outcomes by multimorbidity status.</p><p><strong>Subjects: </strong>Medicare admissions from 2017 to 2019 for heart attack, heart failure and pneumonia. To illustrate our methods, we report on 4 hospitals in the same region: a well-known \\\"Flagship\\\" teaching Hospital, an Affiliated Hospital within the same flagship system, a Poor-Performing Hospital that is not part of the flagship system, and a Small Hospital with unstable estimates.</p><p><strong>Measures: </strong>Thirty-day mortality and revisit rates.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Report cards for each example hospital.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Matched report cards allow users to better benchmark hospitals and see those types of patients where a specific hospital is performing poorly compared to other hospitals treating very similar patients.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":18364,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Medical Care\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-09-16\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Medical Care\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1097/MLR.0000000000002188\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Medical Care","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/MLR.0000000000002188","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景和目的:为了改进现有的医院分级系统,我们开发了一种基于多元匹配的新报告卡。研究设计:配对队列。对于每个重点医院患者,我们匹配10名在全国“资源充足”、具有优秀医院特征的医院接受治疗的对照患者,以及10名在“典型”医院接受治疗的对照患者,这些患者来自医疗保险索赔的300多个患者特征。分级是基于焦点医院的患者和他们匹配的对照组之间的结果差异。我们还创建了一个“类比”匹配,由多个对照患者组成,这些患者与每个具有相似患者特征的重点医院患者相匹配,这些患者在具有相似特征的重点医院接受治疗,回答这个问题,“与我的患者相比,那些看起来像我的患者并且在与我的医院相似的医院接受治疗的患者的表现如何?”我们也报告了多病状态的结果。研究对象:2017年至2019年因心脏病发作、心力衰竭和肺炎入院的医疗保险。为了说明我们的方法,我们报告了同一地区的4家医院:一家知名的“旗舰”教学医院,同一旗舰系统内的附属医院,一家不属于旗舰系统的表现不佳的医院,以及一家估值不稳定的小医院。测量方法:30天死亡率和重访率。结果:各样本医院的报告卡。结论:匹配的报告卡允许用户更好地基准医院,并看到与其他医院治疗非常相似的患者相比,特定医院表现较差的患者类型。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Grading Hospitals Using Multivariate Matching.

Background and objectives: To improve upon existing hospital grading systems, we developed a new report card based on multivariate matching.

Research design: Matched cohorts. For each focal hospital patient, we match 10 control patients treated at "well-resourced" hospitals with excellent hospital characteristics from across the nation, and 10 control patients treated at "typical" hospitals, on over 300 patient characteristics from Medicare Claims. Grades were based on outcome differences between patients at the focal hospital and their matched controls. We also create an "Analogous" match that is comprised of multiple control patients matched to each focal hospital patient with similar patient characteristics who were treated at hospitals with similar characteristics to the focal hospital, answering the question, "How would patients who looked like my patients and who were treated at hospitals like my hospital fare, compared to how my patients fared." We also report outcomes by multimorbidity status.

Subjects: Medicare admissions from 2017 to 2019 for heart attack, heart failure and pneumonia. To illustrate our methods, we report on 4 hospitals in the same region: a well-known "Flagship" teaching Hospital, an Affiliated Hospital within the same flagship system, a Poor-Performing Hospital that is not part of the flagship system, and a Small Hospital with unstable estimates.

Measures: Thirty-day mortality and revisit rates.

Results: Report cards for each example hospital.

Conclusions: Matched report cards allow users to better benchmark hospitals and see those types of patients where a specific hospital is performing poorly compared to other hospitals treating very similar patients.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Medical Care
Medical Care 医学-公共卫生、环境卫生与职业卫生
CiteScore
5.20
自引率
3.30%
发文量
228
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Rated as one of the top ten journals in healthcare administration, Medical Care is devoted to all aspects of the administration and delivery of healthcare. This scholarly journal publishes original, peer-reviewed papers documenting the most current developments in the rapidly changing field of healthcare. This timely journal reports on the findings of original investigations into issues related to the research, planning, organization, financing, provision, and evaluation of health services.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信