» Articles » PMID: 8428812

The Relationship Between Adjusted Hospital Mortality and the Results of Peer Review

Overview
Journal Health Serv Res
Specialty Health Services
Date 1993 Feb 1
PMID 8428812
Citations 10
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

This study assessed the relationship between the Health Care Financing Administration adjusted mortality rate for a hospital and the errors in care found by the peer review process. The three data sets used were: (1) the 1987-1988 completed reviews from 38 peer review organizations (PROs) of 4,132 hospitals and 2,035,128 patients; (2) all 1987 hospital mortality rates for Medicare patients as adjusted by HCFA for patient mix; and (3) the 1986 American Hospital Association Survey. The PRO data were used to compute the percentage of cases reviewed from each hospital confirmed by a reviewing physician to have a quality problem. The average percentage of confirmed problems was 3.73 percent with state rates ranging from 0.03 percent to 38.5 percent. The average within-state correlation between the problem rate and the adjusted mortality rate for all PROs was .19 (p < .0001), but the correlations were much higher for relatively homogeneous groups of hospitals, .42 for public hospitals and .36 for hospitals in large metropolitan statistical areas (MSAs). These results suggest that the HCFA adjusted hospital mortality rate and the PRO-confirmed problem rate are related methods to compare hospitals on the basis of quality of care. Both methods may compare quality better if used within a group of homogenous hospitals.

Citing Articles

The impact of extreme-risk cases on hospitals' risk-adjusted percutaneous coronary intervention mortality ratings.

Sherwood M, Brennan J, Ho K, Masoudi F, Messenger J, Weaver W JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2014; 8(1 Pt A):10-6.

PMID: 25499301 PMC: 5359017. DOI: 10.1016/j.jcin.2014.07.025.


Evaluation of the DAVROS (Development And Validation of Risk-adjusted Outcomes for Systems of emergency care) risk-adjustment model as a quality indicator for healthcare.

Wilson R, Goodacre S, Klingbajl M, Kelly A, Rainer T, Coats T Emerg Med J. 2013; 31(6):471-5.

PMID: 23605036 PMC: 4033152. DOI: 10.1136/emermed-2013-202359.


What is the empirical evidence that hospitals with higher-risk adjusted mortality rates provide poorer quality care? A systematic review of the literature.

Pitches D, Mohammed M, Lilford R BMC Health Serv Res. 2007; 7:91.

PMID: 17584919 PMC: 1924858. DOI: 10.1186/1472-6963-7-91.


Are diagnosis specific outcome indicators based on administrative data useful in assessing quality of hospital care?.

Scott I, Youlden D, Coory M Qual Saf Health Care. 2004; 13(1):32-9.

PMID: 14757797 PMC: 1758063. DOI: 10.1136/qshc.2002.003996.


Mortality and length of stay in a veterans affairs hospital and private sector hospitals serving a common market.

Rosenthal G, Vaughan Sarrazin M, Harper D, Fuehrer S J Gen Intern Med. 2003; 18(8):601-8.

PMID: 12911641 PMC: 1494896. DOI: 10.1046/j.1525-1497.2003.11209.x.


References
1.
Hsia D, Krushat W, Fagan A, Tebbutt J, Kusserow R . Accuracy of diagnostic coding for Medicare patients under the prospective-payment system. N Engl J Med. 1988; 318(6):352-5. DOI: 10.1056/NEJM198802113180604. View

2.
Dubois R, Rogers W, Moxley 3rd J, Draper D, Brook R . Hospital inpatient mortality. Is it a predictor of quality?. N Engl J Med. 1987; 317(26):1674-80. DOI: 10.1056/NEJM198712243172626. View

3.
Eastaugh S . Hospital quality scorecards, patient severity, and the emerging value shopper. Hosp Health Serv Adm. 1986; 31(6):85-102. View

4.
KRAKAUER H, Bailey R, Skellan K, Stewart J, Hartz A, Kuhn E . Evaluation of the HCFA model for the analysis of mortality following hospitalization. Health Serv Res. 1992; 27(3):317-35. PMC: 1069881. View

5.
Park R, Brook R, Kosecoff J, Keesey J, Rubenstein L, Keeler E . Explaining variations in hospital death rates. Randomness, severity of illness, quality of care. JAMA. 1990; 264(4):484-90. View