Healthcare quality measures are statistics that serve to evaluate healthcare providers and identify those that need to improve their care. Before using these measures in clinical practice, developers and reviewers assess measure reliability, which describes the degree to which differences in the measure values reflect actual variation in healthcare quality, as opposed to random noise. The Inter-Unit Reliability (IUR) is a popular statistic for assessing reliability, and it describes the proportion of total variation in a measure that is attributable to between-provider variation. However, Kalbfleisch, He, Xia, and Li (2018) [Health Services and Outcomes Research Methodology, 18, 215-225] have argued that the IUR has a severe limitation in that some of the between-provider variation may be unrelated to quality of care. In this paper, we illustrate the practical implications of this limitation through several concrete examples. We show that certain best-practices in measure development, such as careful risk adjustment and exclusion of unstable measure values, can decrease the sample IUR value. These findings uncover potential negative consequences of discarding measures with IUR values below some arbitrary threshold.

We developed and validated the Influenza Severity Scale (ISS), a standardized risk assessment for influenza, to estimate and predict the probability of major clinical events in patients with laboratory-confirmed infection. Data from the Canadian Immunization Research Network\'s Serious Outcomes Surveillance Network (2011/2012-2018/2019 influenza seasons) enabled the selecting of all laboratory-confirmed influenza patients. A machine learning-based approach then identified variables, generated weighted scores, and evaluated model performance. This study included 12,954 patients with laboratory-confirmed influenza infections. The optimal scale encompassed ten variables: demographic (age and sex), health history (smoking status, chronic pulmonary disease, diabetes mellitus, and influenza vaccination status), clinical presentation (cough, sputum production, and shortness of breath), and function (need for regular support for activities of daily living). As a continuous variable, the scale had an AU-ROC of 0.73 (95% CI, 0.71-0.74). Aggregated scores classified participants into three risk categories: low (ISS < 30; 79.9% sensitivity, 51% specificity), moderate (ISS ≥ 30 but < 50; 54.5% sensitivity, 55.9% specificity), and high (ISS ≥ 50; 51.4% sensitivity, 80.5% specificity). ISS demonstrated a solid ability to identify patients with hospitalized laboratory-confirmed influenza at increased risk for Major Clinical Events, potentially impacting clinical practice and research.

BACKGROUND: When comparing outcomes after sepsis, it is essential to account for patient case mix to make fair comparisons. We developed a model to assess risk-adjusted 30-day mortality in the Michigan Hospital Medicine Safety sepsis initiative (HMS-Sepsis).
OBJECTIVE: Can HMS-Sepsis registry data adequately predict risk of 30-day mortality? Do performance assessments using adjusted vs unadjusted data differ?
METHODS: Retrospective cohort of community-onset sepsis hospitalizations in the HMS-Sepsis registry (April 2022-September 2023), with split-derivation (70%) and validation (30%) cohorts. We fit a risk-adjustment model (HMS-Sepsis mortality model) incorporating acute physiologic, demographic, and baseline health data and assessed model performance using concordance (C) statistics, Brier\'s scores, and comparisons of predicted vs observed mortality by deciles of risk. We compared hospital performance (first quintile, middle quintiles, fifth quintile) using observed vs adjusted mortality to understand the extent to which risk adjustment impacted hospital performance assessment.
RESULTS: Among 17,514 hospitalizations from 66 hospitals during the study period, 12,260 hospitalizations (70%) were used for model derivation and 5,254 hospitalizations (30%) were used for model validation. Thirty-day mortality for the total cohort was 19.4%. The final model included 13 physiologic variables, two physiologic interactions, and 16 demographic and chronic health variables. The most significant variables were age, metastatic solid tumor, temperature, altered mental status, and platelet count. The model C statistic was 0.82 for the derivation cohort, 0.81 for the validation cohort, and ≥ 0.78 for all subgroups assessed. Overall calibration error was 0.0%, and mean calibration error across deciles of risk was 1.5%. Standardized mortality ratios yielded different assessments than observed mortality for 33.9% of hospitals.
CONCLUSIONS: The HMS-Sepsis mortality model showed strong discrimination and adequate calibration and reclassified one-third of hospitals to a different performance category from unadjusted mortality. Based on its strong performance, the HMS-Sepsis mortality model can aid in fair hospital benchmarking, assessment of temporal changes, and observational causal inference analysis.

BACKGROUND: In the hospital setting, frailty is a significant risk factor, but difficult to measure in clinical practice. We propose a reweighting of an existing diagnoses-based frailty score using routine data from a tertiary care teaching hospital in southern Germany.
METHODS: The dataset includes patient characteristics such as sex, age, primary and secondary diagnoses and in-hospital mortality. Based on this information, we recalculate the existing Hospital Frailty Risk Score. The cohort includes patients aged ≥ 75 and was divided into a development cohort (admission year 2011 to 2013, N = 30,525) and a validation cohort (2014, N = 11,202). A limited external validation is also conducted in a second validation cohort containing inpatient cases aged ≥ 75 in 2022 throughout Germany (N = 491,251). In the development cohort, LASSO regression analysis was used to select the most relevant variables and to generate a reweighted Frailty Score for the German setting. Discrimination is assessed using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC). Visualization of calibration curves and decision curve analysis were carried out. Applicability of the reweighted Frailty Score in a non-elderly population was assessed using logistic regression models.
RESULTS: Reweighting of the Frailty Score included only 53 out of the 109 frailty-related diagnoses and resulted in substantially better discrimination than the initial weighting of the score (AUC = 0.89 vs. AUC = 0.80, p < 0.001 in the validation cohort). Calibration curves show a good agreement between score-based predictions and actual observed mortality. Additional external validation using inpatient cases aged ≥ 75 in 2022 throughout Germany (N = 491,251) confirms the results regarding discrimination and calibration and underlines the geographic and temporal validity of the reweighted Frailty Score. Decision curve analysis indicates that the clinical usefulness of the reweighted score as a general decision support tool is superior to the initial version of the score. Assessment of the applicability of the reweighted Frailty Score in a non-elderly population (N = 198,819) shows that discrimination is superior to the initial version of the score (AUC = 0.92 vs. AUC = 0.87, p < 0.001). In addition, we observe a fairly age-stable influence of the reweighted Frailty Score on in-hospital mortality, which does not differ substantially for women and men.
CONCLUSIONS: Our data indicate that the reweighted Frailty Score is superior to the original Frailty Score for identification of older, frail patients at risk for in-hospital mortality. Hence, we recommend using the reweighted Frailty Score in the German in-hospital setting.

BACKGROUND: Ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) is associated with increased mortality, prolonged mechanical ventilation, and longer intensive care unit stays. The rate of VAP (VAPs per 1000 ventilator days) within a hospital is an important quality metric. Despite adoption of preventative strategies, rates of VAP in injured patients remain high in trauma centers. Here, we report variation in risk-adjusted VAP rates within a statewide quality collaborative.
METHODS: Using Michigan Trauma Quality Improvement Program data from 35 American College of Surgeons-verified Level I and Level II trauma centers between November 1, 2020 and January 31, 2023, a patient-level Poisson model was created to evaluate the risk-adjusted rate of VAP across institutions given the number of ventilator days, adjusting for injury severity, physiologic parameters, and comorbid conditions. Patient-level model results were summed to create center-level estimates. We performed observed-to-expected adjustments to calculate each center\'s risk-adjusted VAP days and flagged outliers as hospitals whose confidence intervals lay above or below the overall mean.
RESULTS: We identified 538 VAP occurrences among a total of 33,038 ventilator days within the collaborative, with an overall mean of 16.3 VAPs per 1000 ventilator days. We found wide variation in risk-adjusted rates of VAP, ranging from 0 (0-8.9) to 33.0 (14.4-65.1) VAPs per 1000 d. Several hospitals were identified as high or low outliers.
CONCLUSIONS: There exists significant variation in the rate of VAP among trauma centers. Investigation of practices and factors influencing the differences between low and high outlier institutions may yield information to reduce variation and improve outcomes.

暂无摘要。

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to investigate whether a significant trend regarding inpatient falls in Swiss acute care hospitals between 2011 and 2019 could be confirmed on a national level, and whether the trend persists after risk adjustment for patient-related fall risk factors.
METHODS: A secondary data analysis was conducted based on annual multicentre cross-sectional studies carried out between 2011 and 2019.
METHODS: All Swiss acute care hospitals were obliged to participate in the surveys. Except for emergency departments, outpatient wards and recovery rooms, all wards were included.
METHODS: All inpatients aged 18 or older who had given their informed consent and whose data were complete and available were included.
METHODS: Whether a patient had fallen in the hospital was retrospectively determined on the survey day by asking patients the following question: Have you fallen in this institution in the last 30 days?
RESULTS: Based on data from 110 892 patients from 222 Swiss hospitals, a national inpatient fall rate of 3.7% was determined over the 9 survey years. A significant linear decreasing trend (p=0.004) was observed using the Cochran-Armitage trend test. After adjusting for patient-related fall risk factors in a two-level random intercept logistic regression model, a significant non-linear decreasing trend was found at the national level.
CONCLUSIONS: A significant decrease in fall rates in Swiss hospitals, indicating an improvement in the quality of care provided, could be confirmed both descriptively and after risk adjustment. However, the non-linear trend, that is, an initial decrease in inpatient falls that flattens out over time, also indicates a possible future increase in fall rates. Monitoring of falls in hospitals should be maintained at the national level. Risk adjustment accounts for the observed increase in patient-related fall risk factors in hospitals, thus promoting a fairer comparison of the quality of care provided over time.

BACKGROUND: The Joint Commission uses nulliparous, term, singleton, vertex, cesarean delivery (NTSV-CD) rates to assess hospitals\' perinatal care quality through the Cesarean Birth measurement (PC-02). However, these rates are not risk-adjusted for maternal health factors, putting this measure at odds with the risk adjustment paradigm of most publicly reported hospital quality measures. Here, the authors tested whether risk adjustment for readily documented maternal risk factors affected hospital-level NTSV-CD rates in a large health system.
METHODS: Included were all consecutive NTSV pregnancies from January 2019 to April 2023 across 10 hospitals in one health system. Logistic regression, adjusting for age, obesity, diabetes, and hypertensive disorders. was used to calculate hospital-level risk-adjusted NTSV-CD rates by multiplying observed vs. expected ratios for each hospital by the systemwide unadjusted NTSV-CD rate. The authors calculated intrahospital risk differences between unadjusted and risk-adjusted rates and calculated the percentage of hospitals qualifying for different reporting status after risk adjustment using the 30% Joint Commission reporting threshold rate.
RESULTS: Of 23,866 pregnancies, 6,550 (27.4%) had cesarean deliveries. Across 10 hospitals, the number of deliveries ranged from 393 to 7,671, with unadjusted NTSV-CD rates ranging from 21.0% to 30.5%. Risk-adjusted NTSV-CD rates ranged from 21.5% to 30.4%, with absolute intrahospital differences in risk-adjusted vs. unadjusted rates ranging from -1.33% (indicating lower rate after risk adjustment) to 3.37% (indicating higher rate after risk adjustment). Three of 10 (30.0%) hospitals qualified for different reporting statuses after risk adjustment.
CONCLUSIONS: Risk adjustment for age, obesity, diabetes, and hypertensive disorders is feasible and resulted in meaningful changes in hospital-level NTSV-CD rates with potentially impactful consequences for hospitals near The Joint Commission reporting threshold.

暂无摘要。

With Medicare Advantage (MA) enrollment surpassing 50 percent of Medicare beneficiaries, accurate risk-adjusted plan payment rates are essential. However, artificially exaggerated coding intensity, where plans seek to enhance measured health risk through the addition or inflation of diagnoses, may threaten payment rate integrity. One factor that may play a role in escalating coding intensity is health risk assessments (HRAs)-typically in-home reviews of enrollees\' health status-that enable plans to capture information about their enrollees. In this study, we evaluated the impact of HRAs on Hierarchical Condition Categories (HCC) risk scores, variation in this impact across contracts, and the aggregate payment impact of HRAs, using 2019 MA encounter data. We found that 44.4 percent of MA beneficiaries had at least one HRA. Among those with at least one HRA, HCC scores increased by 12.8 percent, on average, as a result of HRAs. More than one in five enrollees had at least one additional HRA-captured diagnosis, which raised their HCC score. Potential scenarios restricting the risk-score impact of HRAs correspond with $4.5-$12.3 billion in reduced Medicare spending in 2020. Addressing increased coding intensity due to HRAs will improve the value of Medicare spending and ensure appropriate payment in the MA program.