检验交叉设置措施解决医院门诊TJA程序上升趋势的可行性。

IF 4.4 1区 医学 Q1 ORTHOPEDICS Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, American Volume Pub Date : 2024-12-05 DOI:10.2106/JBJS.23.01395
Lori R Wallace, Zhen Tan, Andrea Barthel, Matthew P Sáenz, Jacqueline N Grady, Kathleen M B Balestracci, Kevin J Bozic, Raquel Myers, Dena L McDonough, Zhenqiu Lin, Lisa G Suter
{"title":"检验交叉设置措施解决医院门诊TJA程序上升趋势的可行性。","authors":"Lori R Wallace, Zhen Tan, Andrea Barthel, Matthew P Sáenz, Jacqueline N Grady, Kathleen M B Balestracci, Kevin J Bozic, Raquel Myers, Dena L McDonough, Zhenqiu Lin, Lisa G Suter","doi":"10.2106/JBJS.23.01395","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Elective primary total hip and total knee arthroplasty (collectively, total joint arthroplasties [TJAs]) are commonly performed procedures that can reduce pain and improve function. TJAs are generally safe, but complications can occur. Although historically performed as inpatient procedures, TJAs are increasingly being performed in the outpatient setting. We sought to develop a scientifically acceptable cross-setting measure for evaluating care quality across inpatient and outpatient settings.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Using Medicare administrative claims and enrollment data for qualifying TJA patients, we respecified the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) inpatient-only risk-standardized TJA complications measure to assess complication rates following elective primary TJAs performed in an inpatient or outpatient setting. We aligned inpatient and outpatient coding practices and used hierarchical logistic regression to calculate hospital-specific, risk-standardized complication rates (RSCRs). Lower rates correspond to better quality. Using accepted approaches for CMS measures, we tested measure reliability and vetted key measure decisions with patient and provider input.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A single combined model including the procedure setting as a risk variable produced the highest discrimination (C-statistic for a single combined model with a setting indicator: 0.664, C-statistic for the inpatient-only model: 0.651, C-statistic for the outpatient-only model: 0.638). Among the 2,747 hospitals with at least 25 TJAs, the mean RSCR (using the combined model with a setting indicator) was 2.91% (median RSCR: 2.85%; interquartile range: 2.59% to 3.18%). The median odds ratio for complication occurrence at a higher-risk hospital compared with a lower-risk hospital was 1.33.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>We respecified a measure to assess hospital inpatient or outpatient TJA performance and evaluated the reliability and validity of the measure. The findings showed variation in hospital-level complication rates across settings as indicated by this measure, supporting the feasibility of evaluating hospital performance using a more representative population than inpatient TJAs alone.</p><p><strong>Level of evidence: </strong>Prognostic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.</p>","PeriodicalId":15273,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, American Volume","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Testing the Feasibility of a Cross-Setting Measure to Address the Rising Trend in Hospital Outpatient TJA Procedures.\",\"authors\":\"Lori R Wallace, Zhen Tan, Andrea Barthel, Matthew P Sáenz, Jacqueline N Grady, Kathleen M B Balestracci, Kevin J Bozic, Raquel Myers, Dena L McDonough, Zhenqiu Lin, Lisa G Suter\",\"doi\":\"10.2106/JBJS.23.01395\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Elective primary total hip and total knee arthroplasty (collectively, total joint arthroplasties [TJAs]) are commonly performed procedures that can reduce pain and improve function. TJAs are generally safe, but complications can occur. Although historically performed as inpatient procedures, TJAs are increasingly being performed in the outpatient setting. We sought to develop a scientifically acceptable cross-setting measure for evaluating care quality across inpatient and outpatient settings.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Using Medicare administrative claims and enrollment data for qualifying TJA patients, we respecified the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) inpatient-only risk-standardized TJA complications measure to assess complication rates following elective primary TJAs performed in an inpatient or outpatient setting. We aligned inpatient and outpatient coding practices and used hierarchical logistic regression to calculate hospital-specific, risk-standardized complication rates (RSCRs). Lower rates correspond to better quality. Using accepted approaches for CMS measures, we tested measure reliability and vetted key measure decisions with patient and provider input.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A single combined model including the procedure setting as a risk variable produced the highest discrimination (C-statistic for a single combined model with a setting indicator: 0.664, C-statistic for the inpatient-only model: 0.651, C-statistic for the outpatient-only model: 0.638). Among the 2,747 hospitals with at least 25 TJAs, the mean RSCR (using the combined model with a setting indicator) was 2.91% (median RSCR: 2.85%; interquartile range: 2.59% to 3.18%). The median odds ratio for complication occurrence at a higher-risk hospital compared with a lower-risk hospital was 1.33.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>We respecified a measure to assess hospital inpatient or outpatient TJA performance and evaluated the reliability and validity of the measure. The findings showed variation in hospital-level complication rates across settings as indicated by this measure, supporting the feasibility of evaluating hospital performance using a more representative population than inpatient TJAs alone.</p><p><strong>Level of evidence: </strong>Prognostic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":15273,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, American Volume\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-12-05\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, American Volume\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.23.01395\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ORTHOPEDICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, American Volume","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.23.01395","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:选择性原发性全髋关节和全膝关节置换术(统称为全关节置换术[TJAs])是一种常见的手术,可以减轻疼痛和改善功能。tja通常是安全的,但可能会发生并发症。虽然历来作为住院治疗,但tja越来越多地在门诊进行。我们试图开发一种科学上可接受的交叉设置措施来评估住院和门诊设置的护理质量。方法:使用符合条件的TJA患者的医疗保险行政索赔和登记数据,我们重新指定了医疗保险和医疗补助服务中心(CMS)仅限住院患者的风险标准化TJA并发症测量,以评估在住院或门诊环境中进行选择性原发性TJA后的并发症发生率。我们将住院患者和门诊患者的编码实践进行了对比,并使用分层逻辑回归计算了医院特异性的、风险标准化的并发症发生率(RSCRs)。较低的费率对应着较好的质量。使用公认的CMS测量方法,我们测试了测量的可靠性,并根据患者和提供者的输入审查了关键测量决策。结果:以程序设置为风险变量的单一组合模型产生了最高的歧视(具有设置指标的单一组合模型的c统计量为0.664,仅住院模型的c统计量为0.651,仅门诊模型的c统计量为0.638)。在2747家至少有25家TJAs的医院中,RSCR(采用带设定指标的联合模型)的平均值为2.91%(中位RSCR: 2.85%;四分位数范围:2.59% ~ 3.18%)。高危医院与低危医院并发症发生率的中位优势比为1.33。结论:我们重新定义了一种评估住院或门诊患者TJA表现的方法,并评估了该方法的信度和效度。研究结果显示,该措施表明,不同情况下医院级并发症发生率存在差异,这支持了使用比单独住院患者TJAs更具代表性的人群来评估医院绩效的可行性。证据等级:预后III级。有关证据水平的完整描述,请参见作者说明。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Testing the Feasibility of a Cross-Setting Measure to Address the Rising Trend in Hospital Outpatient TJA Procedures.

Background: Elective primary total hip and total knee arthroplasty (collectively, total joint arthroplasties [TJAs]) are commonly performed procedures that can reduce pain and improve function. TJAs are generally safe, but complications can occur. Although historically performed as inpatient procedures, TJAs are increasingly being performed in the outpatient setting. We sought to develop a scientifically acceptable cross-setting measure for evaluating care quality across inpatient and outpatient settings.

Methods: Using Medicare administrative claims and enrollment data for qualifying TJA patients, we respecified the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) inpatient-only risk-standardized TJA complications measure to assess complication rates following elective primary TJAs performed in an inpatient or outpatient setting. We aligned inpatient and outpatient coding practices and used hierarchical logistic regression to calculate hospital-specific, risk-standardized complication rates (RSCRs). Lower rates correspond to better quality. Using accepted approaches for CMS measures, we tested measure reliability and vetted key measure decisions with patient and provider input.

Results: A single combined model including the procedure setting as a risk variable produced the highest discrimination (C-statistic for a single combined model with a setting indicator: 0.664, C-statistic for the inpatient-only model: 0.651, C-statistic for the outpatient-only model: 0.638). Among the 2,747 hospitals with at least 25 TJAs, the mean RSCR (using the combined model with a setting indicator) was 2.91% (median RSCR: 2.85%; interquartile range: 2.59% to 3.18%). The median odds ratio for complication occurrence at a higher-risk hospital compared with a lower-risk hospital was 1.33.

Conclusions: We respecified a measure to assess hospital inpatient or outpatient TJA performance and evaluated the reliability and validity of the measure. The findings showed variation in hospital-level complication rates across settings as indicated by this measure, supporting the feasibility of evaluating hospital performance using a more representative population than inpatient TJAs alone.

Level of evidence: Prognostic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
8.90
自引率
7.50%
发文量
660
审稿时长
1 months
期刊介绍: The Journal of Bone & Joint Surgery (JBJS) has been the most valued source of information for orthopaedic surgeons and researchers for over 125 years and is the gold standard in peer-reviewed scientific information in the field. A core journal and essential reading for general as well as specialist orthopaedic surgeons worldwide, The Journal publishes evidence-based research to enhance the quality of care for orthopaedic patients. Standards of excellence and high quality are maintained in everything we do, from the science of the content published to the customer service we provide. JBJS is an independent, non-profit journal.
期刊最新文献
Association Between Surgeon Volume and Patient Outcomes After Elective Patellofemoral Arthroplasty: A Population-Based Cohort Study Using Data from the National Joint Registry and Hospital Episode Statistics for England. Sclerotic Bone Adversely Affects Anti-Tuberculosis Drug Distribution in Patients with Spinal Tuberculosis: A Prospective Cross-Sectional Study. Comparison of Adductor Canal Block Before Versus After Total Knee Arthroplasty in Terms of Pain, Stress, and Functional Outcomes: A Double-Blinded Randomized Controlled Trial. Dysfunction of the Windlass Mechanism Is Associated with Hallux Rigidus: A Case-Control Study. What's Important (Arts & Humanities): The Bone Question.
×
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