Dataset Information

Hospital performance comparison of inpatient fall rates; the impact of risk adjusting for patient-related factors: a multicentre cross-sectional survey.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Comparing inpatient fall rates can serve as a benchmark for quality improvement. To improve the comparability of performance between hospitals, adjustments for patient-related fall risk factors that are not modifiable by care are recommended. Thereafter, the remaining variability in risk-adjusted fall rates can be attributed to differences in quality of care provided by a hospital. Research on risk-adjusted fall rates and their impact on hospital comparisons is currently sparse. Therefore, the aims of this study were to develop an inpatient fall risk adjustment model based on patient-related fall risk factors, and to analyse the impact of applying this model on comparisons of inpatient fall rates in acute care hospitals in Switzerland.

Methods

Data on inpatient falls in Swiss acute care hospitals were collected on one day in 2017, 2018 and 2019, as part of an annual multicentre cross-sectional survey. After excluding maternity and outpatient wards, all inpatients older than 18 years were included. Two-level logistic regression models were used to construct unadjusted and risk-adjusted caterpillar plots to compare inter-hospital variability in inpatient fall rates.

Results

One hundred thirty eight hospitals and 35,998 patients were included in the analysis. Risk adjustment showed that the following factors were associated with a higher risk of falling: increasing care dependency (to a great extent care dependent, odds ratio 3.43, 95% confidence interval 2.78-4.23), a fall in the last 12 months (OR 2.14, CI 1.89-2.42), the intake of sedative and or psychotropic medications (OR 1.74, CI 1.54-1.98), mental and behavioural disorders (OR 1.55, CI 1.36-1.77) and higher age (OR 1.01, CI 1.01-1.02). With odds ratios between 1.26 and 0.67, eight further ICD-10 diagnosis groups were included. Female sex (OR 0.78, CI 0.70-0.88) and postoperative patients (OR 0.83, CI 0.73-0.95) were associated with a lower risk of falling. Unadjusted caterpillar plots identified 20 low- and 3 high-performing hospitals. After risk adjustment, 2 low-performing hospitals remained.

Conclusions

Risk adjustment of inpatient fall rates could reduce misclassification of hospital performance and enables a fairer basis for decision-making and quality improvement measures. Patient-related fall risk factors such as care dependency, history of falls and cognitive impairment should be routinely assessed.

SUBMITTER: Bernet NS

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8857794 | biostudies-literature | 2022 Feb

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Hospital performance comparison of inpatient fall rates; the impact of risk adjusting for patient-related factors: a multicentre cross-sectional survey.

Bernet Niklaus S NS Everink Irma Hj IH Schols Jos Mga JM Halfens Ruud Jg RJ Richter Dirk D Hahn Sabine S

BMC health services research 20220218 1

<h4>Background</h4>Comparing inpatient fall rates can serve as a benchmark for quality improvement. To improve the comparability of performance between hospitals, adjustments for patient-related fall risk factors that are not modifiable by care are recommended. Thereafter, the remaining variability in risk-adjusted fall rates can be attributed to differences in quality of care provided by a hospital. Research on risk-adjusted fall rates and their impact on hospital comparisons is currently spars ...[more]

PMID: 35180859

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundInpatient falls in hospitals are an acknowledged indicator of quality of care. International comparisons could highlight quality improvement potential and enable cross-national learning. Key to fair cross-national comparison is the availability of a risk adjustment model validated in an international context. This study aimed to 1) ascertain that the variables of the inpatient fall risk adjustment model do not interact with country and thus can be used for risk adjustment, 2) compare the risk of falling in hospitals between Switzerland and Austria after risk adjustment.MethodsThe data on inpatient falls from Swiss and Austrian acute care hospitals were collected on a single measurement day in 2017, 2018 and 2019 as part of an international multicentre cross-sectional study. Multilevel logistic regression models were used to screen for interaction effects between the patient-related fall risk factors and the countries. The risks of falling in hospital in Switzerland and in Austria were compared after applying the risk-adjustment model.ResultsData from 176 hospitals and 43,984 patients revealed an inpatient fall rate of 3.4% in Switzerland and 3.9% in Austria. Two of 15 patient-related fall risk variables showed an interaction effect with country: Patients who had fallen in the last 12 months (OR 1.49, 95% CI 1.10-2.01, p = 0.009) or had taken sedatives/psychotropic medication (OR 1.40, 95% CI 1.05-1.87, p = 0.022) had higher odds of falling in Austrian hospitals. Significantly higher odds of falling were observed in Austrian (OR 1.38, 95% CI 1.13-1.68, p = 0.002) compared to Swiss hospitals after applying the risk-adjustment model.ConclusionsAlmost all patient-related fall risk factors in the model are suitable for a risk-adjusted cross-country comparison, as they do not interact with the countries. Further model validation with additional countries is warranted, particularly to assess the interaction of risk factors "fall in the last 12 months" and "sedatives/psychotropic medication intake" with country variable. The study underscores the crucial role of an appropriate risk-adjustment model in ensuring fair international comparisons of inpatient falls, as the risk-adjusted, as opposed to the non-risk-adjusted country comparison, indicated significantly higher odds of falling in Austrian compared to Swiss hospitals.

Project description:Background contextThere is growing interest among payers in profiling hospital value and quality-of-care, including both the cost and safety of common surgeries, such as lumbar fusion. Nonetheless, there is sparse evidence describing the statistical reliability of such measures when applied to lumbar fusion for spondylolisthesis.PurposeTo evaluate the reliability of 90-day inpatient hospital costs, overall complications, and rates of serious complications for profiling hospital performance in lumbar fusion surgery for spondylolisthesis.Study design/settingData for this analysis came from State Inpatient Databases from nine states made available through the Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project.Patient samplePatients undergoing elective lumbar spine fusion for spondylolisthesis from 2010 to 2017 in participating states.Outcome measuresStatistical reliability, defined as the ability to distinguish true performance differences across hospitals relative to statistical noise. Reliability was assessed separately for 90-day inpatient costs (standardized across years to 2019 dollars), overall complications, and serious complication rates.MethodsStatistical reliability was measured as the amount of variation between hospitals relative to the total amount of variation for each measure. Total variation includes both between-hospital variation ("signal") and within-hospital variation ("statistical noise"). Thus, reliability equals signal over (signal plus noise) and ranges from 0 to 1. To adjust for differences in patient-level risk and procedural characteristics, hierarchical linear and logistic regression models were created for the cost and complication outcomes. Random hospital intercepts were used to assess between-hospital variation. We evaluated the reliability of each measure by study year and examined the number of hospitals meeting different thresholds of reliability by year.ResultsWe included a total of 66,571 elective lumbar fusion surgeries for spondylolisthesis performed at 244 hospitals during the study period. The mean 90-day hospital cost was $30,827 (2019 dollars). 12.0% of patients experienced a complication within 90 days of surgery, including 7.8% who had a serious complication. The median reliability of 90-day cost ranged from 0.97to 0.99 across study years, and there was a narrow distribution of reliability values. By comparison, the median reliability for the overall complication metric ranged from 0.22 to 0.44, and the reliability of the serious complication measure ranged from 0.30 to 0.49 across the study years. At least 96% of hospitals had high (> 0.7) reliability for cost in any year, whereas only 0-9% and 0-11% of hospitals reached this cutoff for the overall and serious complication rate in any year, respectively. By comparison, 10%-69% of hospitals per year achieved a more moderate threshold of 0.4 reliability for overall complications, compared to 21%-80% of hospitals who achieved this lower reliability threshold for serious complications.Conclusions90-day inpatient costs are highly reliable for assessing variation across hospitals, whereas overall and serious complications are only moderately reliable for profiling performance. These results support the viability of emerging bundled payment programs that assume true differences in costs of care exist across hospitals.

Project description:ImportanceDespite the broad adoption and optimization of electronic health record (EHR) systems across the continuum of care, serious usability and safety problems persist.ObjectiveTo assess whether EHR safety performance is associated with EHR frontline user experience in a national sample of hospitals.Design, setting, and participantsThis cross-sectional study included all US adult hospitals that used the National Quality Forum Leapfrog Health IT Safety Measure and also used the ARCH Collaborative EHR User experience survey from January 1, 2017, to January 1, 2019. Data analysis was performed from September 2020 to November 2022.Main outcomes and measuresThe primary outcomes were hospital performance on the Leapfrog Health IT Safety measure (overall and 10 subcomponents) and the ARCH collaborative frontline user experience scores (overall and 8 subcomponents). Ordinary least squares models with survey responses clustered by hospital were used to assess associations between the overall measures and their subcomponents.ResultsThere were 112 hospitals and 5689 frontline user surveys included in the study. Hospitals scored a mean of 0.673 (range, 0.297-0.973) on the Leapfrog Health IT safety measure; the mean ARCH EHR user experience score was 3.377 (range, 1 [best] to 5 [worst]). The adjusted β coefficient between the overall safety score and overall user experience score was 0.011 (95% CI, 0.006-0.016). The ARCH overall score was also significantly associated with 10 subcategory scores of the Leapfrog Health IT safety score, and the overall Leapfrog score was associated with the 8 subcategory scores of the ARCH user experience score.Conclusions and relevanceThis cross-sectional study found a positive association between frontline user-rated EHR usability and EHR safety performance. This finding suggests that improving EHR usability, which is a current well-known pain point for EHR users, could have direct benefits in terms of improved EHR safety.

Project description:ObjectivesTo investigate the rates and influencing factors of transient ischaemic attack (TIA) inpatient admissions and outpatient visits in China.SettingA door-to-door survey of 178 059 families from 155 urban and rural areas in 31 provinces in China, 2013.ParticipantsTotal 596 536 people were assessed in the annual rate analysis, and 829 TIA patients were assessed in the influencing factor analysis.Main outcome measuresThe weighted annual rates of TIA inpatient admissions and outpatient visits and the factors influencing inpatient admissions and outpatient visits for TIA patients.ResultsThe weighted annual inpatient admission rate per TIA patient was 25.8 (95% CI: 18.4 to 36.2) per 100 000 in the population, whereas the weighted annual inpatient admission rate for patients with TIAs was 32.5 (95% CI: 23.3 to 38.9) per 100 000 in the population. The weighted annual outpatient visit rate per TIA patient was 34.4 (95% CI: 26.2 to 45.1) per 100 000 in the population, whereas the weighted annual outpatient visit rate for patients with TIAs was 149.6 (95% CI: 127.0 to 165.5) per 100 000. The inpatient rate was higher for men than for women (OR: 2.24; 95% CI: 1.40 to 3.59; p=0.001), for TIA patients with stroke than for patients with isolated TIAs (2.93; 2.01 to 4.25; p<0.001), for TIA patients with hypertension than for TIA patients without hypertension (2.60; 1.65 to 4.11; p<0.001). The outpatient rate was higher for TIA patients with stroke than for patients with isolated TIAs (1.88; 1.33 to 2.64; p<0.001), for TIA patients with dyslipidaemia than for TIA patients without dyslipidaemia (1.92; 1.30 to 2.83; p=0.001).ConclusionsThe annual rates of TIA inpatient admissions and outpatient visits in population are low, probably due to the lack of access to inpatient and outpatient services experienced by the majority of TIA patients in the population, and individuals' socio-demographic characteristics, disease histories and stroke prognosis may be associated with inpatient and outpatient TIAs.

Project description:BackgroundDepression and anxiety are commonly reported (40% and 11%-52%) among adults receiving dialysis, compared with ~10% among all Canadians. Mental health in dialysis care is underrecognized and undertreated.Objective(1) To describe preferences for mental health support reported by Albertans receiving dialysis; (2) to compare depression, anxiety, and quality-of-life (QOL) domains for people who would or would not engage in support for mental health; and (3) to explore sociodemographic, mental health, and QOL domains that explain whether people would or would not engage in support for mental health.DesignA cross-sectional survey.SettingAlberta, Canada.PatientsAdults receiving all modalities of dialysis (N = 2972).MeasurementsAn online survey with questions about preferences for mental health support and patient-reported outcome measures (Patient Health Questionnaire-9 [PHQ-9], Generalized Anxiety Disorder-7 [GAD-7], and Kidney Disease QOL Instrument-36 [KDQOL-36]).MethodsTo address objectives 1 and 2, we conducted chi-square tests (for discrete variables) and t tests (for continuous variables) to compare the distributions of the above measures for two groups: Albertans receiving dialysis who would engage or would not engage in support for mental health. We subsequently conducted a series of binary logistic regressions guided by the purposeful variable selection approach to identify a subset of the most relevant explanatory variables for determining whether or not people are more likely to engage in support for mental health (objective 3). To further explain differences between the two groups, we analyzed open-text comments following a summative content analysis approach.ResultsAmong 384 respondents, 72 did not provide a dialysis modality or answer the PHQ-9. The final data set included responses from 312 participants. Of these, 59.6% would consider engaging in support, including discussing medication with a family doctor (72.1%) or nephrologist (62.9%), peer support groups (64.9%), and talk therapy (60%). Phone was slightly favored (73%) over in person at dialysis (67.6%), outpatient (67.2%), or video (59.4%). Moderate to severe depressive symptoms (PHQ-9 score ≥10) was reported by 33.4%, and most respondents (63.9%) reported minimal anxiety symptoms; 36.1% reported mild to severe anxiety symptoms (GAD-7 score ≥5). The mean (SD) PHQ-9 score was 8.9 (6.4) for those who would engage in support, and lower at 5.8 (4.8) for those who would not. The mean (SD) GAD-7 score was 5.2 (5.6) for those who would engage in support and 2.8 (4.1) for those who would not. In the final logistic regression model, people who were unable to work had 2 times the odds of engaging in support than people who are able to work. People were also more likely to engage in support if they had been on dialysis for fewer years and had lower (worse) mental health scores (odds ratios = 1.06 and 1.38, respectively). The final model explained 15.5% (Nagelkerke R2) of the variance and with 66.6% correct classification. We analyzed 146 comments in response to the question, "Is there anything else you like to tell us." The top 2 categories for both groups were QOL and impact of dialysis environment. The third category differed: those who would engage wrote about support, whereas those who would not engage wrote about "dialysis is the least of my worries."LimitationsA low response rate of 12.9% limits representativeness; people who chose not to participate may have different experiences of mental health.ConclusionsIncorporating patients' preferences and willingness to engage in support for mental health will inform future visioning for person-centered mental health care in dialysis.

Project description:BackgroundLowering hospital readmission rates has become a primary target for the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, but studies of the relationship between adherence to the recommended hospital care processes and readmission rates have provided inconsistent and inconclusive results.ObjectiveTo examine the association between hospital performance on Medicare's Hospital Compare process quality measures and 30-day readmission rates for patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI), heart failure and pneumonia, and for those undergoing major surgery.Design, setting and participantsWe assessed hospital performance on process measures using the 2007 Hospital Inpatient Quality Reporting Program. The process measures for each condition were aggregated in two separate measures: Overall Measure (OM) and Appropriate Care Measure (ACM) scores. Readmission rates were calculated using Medicare claims.Main outcome measureRisk-standardized 30-day all-cause readmission rate was calculated as the ratio of predicted to expected rate standardized by the overall mean readmission rate. We calculated predicted readmission rate using hierarchical generalized linear models and adjusting for patient-level factors.ResultsAmong patients aged ≥ 66 years, the median OM score ranged from 79.4 % for abdominal surgery to 95.7 % for AMI, and the median ACM scores ranged from 45.8 % for abdominal surgery to 87.9 % for AMI. We observed a statistically significant, but weak, correlation between performance scores and readmission rates for pneumonia (correlation coefficient R = 0.07), AMI (R = 0.10), and orthopedic surgery (R = 0.06). The difference in the mean readmission rate between hospitals in the 1st and 4th quartiles of process measure performance was statistically significant only for AMI (0.25 percentage points) and pneumonia (0.31 percentage points). Performance on process measures explained less than 1 % of hospital-level variation in readmission rates.ConclusionsHospitals with greater adherence to recommended care processes did not achieve meaningfully better 30-day hospital readmission rates compared to those with lower levels of performance.

Dataset Information

Hospital performance comparison of inpatient fall rates; the impact of risk adjusting for patient-related factors: a multicentre cross-sectional survey.

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

Hospital performance comparison of inpatient fall rates; the impact of risk adjusting for patient-related factors: a multicentre cross-sectional survey.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets