Impact of the method of calculating 30-day readmission rate after hospitalization for heart failure. Data from the VancOuver CoastAL Acute Heart Failure (VOCAL-AHF) registry.

IF 4.8 2区 医学 Q1 CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS European Heart Journal - Quality of Care and Clinical Outcomes Pub Date : 2024-09-13 DOI:10.1093/ehjqcco/qcae026
Samaneh Salimian, Sean A Virani, Thomas M Roston, Ren Jie Robert Yao, Ricky D Turgeon, Justin Ezekowitz, Nathaniel M Hawkins
{"title":"Impact of the method of calculating 30-day readmission rate after hospitalization for heart failure. Data from the VancOuver CoastAL Acute Heart Failure (VOCAL-AHF) registry.","authors":"Samaneh Salimian, Sean A Virani, Thomas M Roston, Ren Jie Robert Yao, Ricky D Turgeon, Justin Ezekowitz, Nathaniel M Hawkins","doi":"10.1093/ehjqcco/qcae026","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Thirty-day readmission rate after heart failure (HF) hospitalization is widely used to evaluate healthcare quality. Methodology may substantially influence estimated rates. We assessed the impact of different definitions on HF and all-cause readmission rates.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Readmission rates were examined in 1835 patients discharged following HF hospitalization using 64 unique definitions derived from five methodological factors: (1) International Classification of Diseases-10 codes (broad vs. narrow), (2) index admission selection (single admission only first-in-year vs. random sample; or multiple admissions in year with vs. without 30-day blanking period), (3) variable denominator (number alive at discharge vs. number alive at 30 days), (4) follow-up period start (discharge date vs. day following discharge), and (5) annual reference period (calendar vs. fiscal). The impact of different factors was assessed using linear regression.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The calculated 30-day readmission rate for HF varied more than two-fold depending solely on the methodological approach (6.5-15.0%). All-cause admission rates exhibited similar variation (18.8-29.9%). The highest rates included all consecutive index admissions (HF 11.1-15.0%, all-cause 24.0-29.9%), and the lowest only one index admission per patient per year (HF 6.5-11.3%, all-cause 18.8-22.7%). When including multiple index admissions and compared with blanking the 30-day post-discharge, not blanking was associated with 2.3% higher readmission rates. Selecting a single admission per year with a first-in-year approach lowered readmission rates by 1.5%, while random-sampling admissions lowered estimates further by 5.2% (P < 0.001).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Calculated 30-day readmission rates varied more than two-fold by altering methods. Transparent and consistent methods are needed to ensure reproducible and comparable reporting.</p>","PeriodicalId":11869,"journal":{"name":"European Heart Journal - Quality of Care and Clinical Outcomes","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11398898/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Heart Journal - Quality of Care and Clinical Outcomes","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/ehjqcco/qcae026","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Thirty-day readmission rate after heart failure (HF) hospitalization is widely used to evaluate healthcare quality. Methodology may substantially influence estimated rates. We assessed the impact of different definitions on HF and all-cause readmission rates.

Methods: Readmission rates were examined in 1835 patients discharged following HF hospitalization using 64 unique definitions derived from five methodological factors: (1) International Classification of Diseases-10 codes (broad vs. narrow), (2) index admission selection (single admission only first-in-year vs. random sample; or multiple admissions in year with vs. without 30-day blanking period), (3) variable denominator (number alive at discharge vs. number alive at 30 days), (4) follow-up period start (discharge date vs. day following discharge), and (5) annual reference period (calendar vs. fiscal). The impact of different factors was assessed using linear regression.

Results: The calculated 30-day readmission rate for HF varied more than two-fold depending solely on the methodological approach (6.5-15.0%). All-cause admission rates exhibited similar variation (18.8-29.9%). The highest rates included all consecutive index admissions (HF 11.1-15.0%, all-cause 24.0-29.9%), and the lowest only one index admission per patient per year (HF 6.5-11.3%, all-cause 18.8-22.7%). When including multiple index admissions and compared with blanking the 30-day post-discharge, not blanking was associated with 2.3% higher readmission rates. Selecting a single admission per year with a first-in-year approach lowered readmission rates by 1.5%, while random-sampling admissions lowered estimates further by 5.2% (P < 0.001).

Conclusion: Calculated 30-day readmission rates varied more than two-fold by altering methods. Transparent and consistent methods are needed to ensure reproducible and comparable reporting.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
心衰住院后 30 天再入院率计算方法的影响。数据来自 VancOuver CoastAL 急性心力衰竭(VOCAL-AHF)登记处。
背景:心力衰竭(HF)住院后 30 天再入院率被广泛用于评估医疗质量。方法可能会对估计的再入院率产生重大影响。我们评估了不同定义对心衰和全因再入院率的影响:对 1835 名心房颤动住院后出院的患者的再入院率进行了研究,使用了从五个方法因素中得出的 64 个独特定义:(1)ICD-10编码(广义与狭义),(2)指标入院选择(单次入院仅为当年首次入院与随机抽样;或当年多次入院有30天空白期与无30天空白期),(3)可变分母(出院时存活人数与30天时存活人数),(4)随访期开始(出院日期与出院次日),(5)年度参照期(日历期与财政期)。使用线性回归评估了不同因素的影响:结果:计算得出的高血压 30 天再入院率因方法不同而相差 2 倍多(6.5% 至 15.0%)。全因入院率也有类似的变化(18.8% 到 29.9%)。最高入院率包括所有连续指数入院(高频 11.1-15.0%,全因 24.0-29.9%),最低入院率为每位患者每年只有一次指数入院(高频 6.5-11.3%,全因 18.8-22.7%)。如果包括多次指标入院并与出院后 30 天内空白相比,不空白与再入院率增加 2.3% 相关。采用 "年中第一例 "的方法每年选择一次入院,可将再入院率降低 1.5%,而随机抽样入院则可将估计值进一步降低 5.2%(p 结论:不同方法计算出的 30 天再入院率相差超过 2 倍。为确保报告的可重复性和可比性,需要采用透明、一致的方法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
9.40
自引率
3.80%
发文量
76
期刊介绍: European Heart Journal - Quality of Care & Clinical Outcomes is an English language, peer-reviewed journal dedicated to publishing cardiovascular outcomes research. It serves as an official journal of the European Society of Cardiology and maintains a close alliance with the European Heart Health Institute. The journal disseminates original research and topical reviews contributed by health scientists globally, with a focus on the quality of care and its impact on cardiovascular outcomes at the hospital, national, and international levels. It provides a platform for presenting the most outstanding cardiovascular outcomes research to influence cardiovascular public health policy on a global scale. Additionally, the journal aims to motivate young investigators and foster the growth of the outcomes research community.
期刊最新文献
Clinicoeconomic burden among heart failure patients with severely reduced ejection fraction after hospital admission: HF-RESTORE. Trends and risk factors analysis of aortic aneurysm mortality in China over thirty years: based on the global burden of disease 2019 data. Cost-effectiveness of a novel AI technology to quantify coronary inflammation and cardiovascular risk in patients undergoing routine Coronary Computed Tomography Angiography. Regional disparities in heart transplant mortality in the United States. Bacteremia and infective endocarditis following left-sided heart valve surgery.
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1