Tags

Type your tag names separated by a space and hit enter

Comparison between clinical registry and medicare claims data on the classification of hospital quality of surgical care.
Ann Surg. 2015 Feb; 261(2):290-6.AnnS

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

To compare the classification of hospital statistical outlier status as better or worse performance than expected for postoperative complications using Medicare claims versus clinical registry data.

BACKGROUND

Controversy remains as to the most favorable data source for measuring postoperative complications for pay-for-performance and public reporting polices.

METHODS

Patient-level records (2005-2008) were linked between the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS-NSQIP) and Medicare inpatient claims. Hospital statistical outlier status for better or worse performance than expected was assessed using each data source for superficial surgical site infection (SSI), deep/organ-space SSI, any SSI, urinary tract infection, pneumonia, sepsis, deep venous thrombosis, pulmonary embolism, venous thromboembolism, and myocardial infarction by developing hierarchical multivariable logistic regression models. Kappa statistics and correlation coefficients assessed agreement between the data sources.

RESULTS

A total of 192 hospitals with 110,987 surgical patients were included. Agreement on hospital rank for complication rates between Medicare claims and ACS-NSQIP was poor-to-moderate (weighted κ: 0.18-0.48). Of hospitals identified as statistical outliers for better or worse performance by Medicare claims, 26% were also identified as outliers by ACS-NSQIP. Of outliers identified by ACS-NSQIP, 16% were also identified as outliers by Medicare claims. Agreement between the data sources on hospital outlier status classification was uniformly poor (weighted κ: -0.02-0.34).

CONCLUSIONS

Despite using the same statistical methodology with each data source, classification of hospital outlier status as better or worse performance than expected for postoperative complications differed substantially between ACS-NSQIP and Medicare claims.

Authors+Show Affiliations

*Department of Surgery, David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California, Los Angeles, CA †Division of Research and Optimal Patient Care, American College of Surgeons, Chicago, IL ‡VA Greater Los Angeles Healthcare System, Los Angeles, CA §Department of Medicine, David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California, Los Angeles, CA ¶Department of Surgery, School of Medicine, Washington University in St Louis and Barnes Jewish Hospital, St Louis, MO; Center for Health Policy and the Olin Business School at Washington University in St Louis, St Louis, MO; and Department of Surgery, John Cochran Veterans Affairs Medical Center, St Louis, MO ‖RAND Corporation, Santa Monica, CA; and **UCLA Jonathan and Karin Fielding School of Public Health, Los Angeles, CA.No affiliation info availableNo affiliation info availableNo affiliation info availableNo affiliation info availableNo affiliation info available

Pub Type(s)

Comparative Study
Evaluation Study
Journal Article
Research Support, U.S. Gov't, Non-P.H.S.

Language

eng

PubMed ID

25569029

Citation

Lawson, Elise H., et al. "Comparison Between Clinical Registry and Medicare Claims Data On the Classification of Hospital Quality of Surgical Care." Annals of Surgery, vol. 261, no. 2, 2015, pp. 290-6.
Lawson EH, Zingmond DS, Hall BL, et al. Comparison between clinical registry and medicare claims data on the classification of hospital quality of surgical care. Ann Surg. 2015;261(2):290-6.
Lawson, E. H., Zingmond, D. S., Hall, B. L., Louie, R., Brook, R. H., & Ko, C. Y. (2015). Comparison between clinical registry and medicare claims data on the classification of hospital quality of surgical care. Annals of Surgery, 261(2), 290-6. https://doi.org/10.1097/SLA.0000000000000707
Lawson EH, et al. Comparison Between Clinical Registry and Medicare Claims Data On the Classification of Hospital Quality of Surgical Care. Ann Surg. 2015;261(2):290-6. PubMed PMID: 25569029.
* Article titles in AMA citation format should be in sentence-case
TY - JOUR T1 - Comparison between clinical registry and medicare claims data on the classification of hospital quality of surgical care. AU - Lawson,Elise H, AU - Zingmond,David S, AU - Hall,Bruce Lee, AU - Louie,Rachel, AU - Brook,Robert H, AU - Ko,Clifford Y, PY - 2015/1/9/entrez PY - 2015/1/9/pubmed PY - 2015/3/10/medline SP - 290 EP - 6 JF - Annals of surgery JO - Ann Surg VL - 261 IS - 2 N2 - OBJECTIVE: To compare the classification of hospital statistical outlier status as better or worse performance than expected for postoperative complications using Medicare claims versus clinical registry data. BACKGROUND: Controversy remains as to the most favorable data source for measuring postoperative complications for pay-for-performance and public reporting polices. METHODS: Patient-level records (2005-2008) were linked between the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS-NSQIP) and Medicare inpatient claims. Hospital statistical outlier status for better or worse performance than expected was assessed using each data source for superficial surgical site infection (SSI), deep/organ-space SSI, any SSI, urinary tract infection, pneumonia, sepsis, deep venous thrombosis, pulmonary embolism, venous thromboembolism, and myocardial infarction by developing hierarchical multivariable logistic regression models. Kappa statistics and correlation coefficients assessed agreement between the data sources. RESULTS: A total of 192 hospitals with 110,987 surgical patients were included. Agreement on hospital rank for complication rates between Medicare claims and ACS-NSQIP was poor-to-moderate (weighted κ: 0.18-0.48). Of hospitals identified as statistical outliers for better or worse performance by Medicare claims, 26% were also identified as outliers by ACS-NSQIP. Of outliers identified by ACS-NSQIP, 16% were also identified as outliers by Medicare claims. Agreement between the data sources on hospital outlier status classification was uniformly poor (weighted κ: -0.02-0.34). CONCLUSIONS: Despite using the same statistical methodology with each data source, classification of hospital outlier status as better or worse performance than expected for postoperative complications differed substantially between ACS-NSQIP and Medicare claims. SN - 1528-1140 UR - https://www.unboundmedicine.com/medline/citation/25569029/Comparison_between_clinical_registry_and_medicare_claims_data_on_the_classification_of_hospital_quality_of_surgical_care_ DB - PRIME DP - Unbound Medicine ER -