Judging hospitals by severity-adjusted mortality rates: the influence of the severity-adjustment method
Iezzoni, Lisa I. ; Ash, Arlene S. ; Shwartz, Michael ; Daley, Jennifer ; Hughes, John S. ; Mackiernan, Yevgenia D.
Citations
Student Authors
Faculty Advisor
Academic Program
UMass Chan Affiliations
Document Type
Publication Date
Keywords
Aged
Aged, 80 and over
Algorithms
Female
*Hospital Mortality
Humans
Information Systems
Length of Stay
Logistic Models
Male
Middle Aged
Mortality
Myocardial Infarction
*Outcome Assessment (Health Care)
Predictive Value of Tests
Probability
*Quality of Health Care
*Severity of Illness Index
United States
Biostatistics
Epidemiology
Health Services Research
Subject Area
Embargo Expiration Date
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: This research examined whether judgments about a hospital's risk-adjusted mortality performance are affected by the severity-adjustment method.
METHODS: Data came from 100 acute care hospitals nationwide and 11880 adults admitted in 1991 for acute myocardial infarction. Ten severity measures were used in separate multivariable logistic models predicting in-hospital death. Observed-to-expected death rates and z scores were calculated with each severity measure for each hospital.
RESULTS: Unadjusted mortality rates for the 100 hospitals ranged from 4.8% to 26.4%. For 32 hospitals, observed mortality rates differed significantly from expected rates for 1 or more, but not for all 10, severity measures. Agreement between pairs of severity measures on whether hospitals were flagged as statistical mortality outliers ranged from fair to good. Severity measures based on medical records frequently disagreed with measures based on discharge abstracts.
CONCLUSIONS: Although the 10 severity measures agreed about relative hospital performance more often than would be expected by chance, assessments of individual hospital mortality rates varied by different severity-adjustment methods.
Source
Am J Public Health. 1996 Oct;86(10):1379-87. Link to article on publisher's site