Association Between the Physician Quality Score in the Merit-Based Incentive Payment System and Hospital Performance in Hospital Compare in the First Year of the Program.

Importance: The scientific validity of the Merit-Based Incentive Payment System (MIPS) quality score as a measure of hospital-level patient outcomes is unknown. Objective: To examine whether better physician performance on the MIPS quality score is associated with better hospital outcomes. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional study of 38 830 physicians used data from the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) Physician Compare (2017) merged with CMS Hospital Compare data. Data analysis was conducted from September to November 2020. Main Outcomes and Measures: Linear regression was used to examine the association between physician MIPS quality scores aggregated at the hospital level and hospitalwide measures of (1) postoperative complications, (2) failure to rescue, (3) individual postoperative complications, and (4) readmissions. Results: The study cohort of 38 830 clinicians (5198 [14.6%] women; 12 103 [31.6%] with 11-20 years in practice) included 6580 (17.2%) general surgeons, 8978 (23.4%) orthopedic surgeons, 1617 (4.2%) vascular surgeons, 582 (1.5%) cardiac surgeons, 904 (2.4%) thoracic surgeons, 18 149 (47.4%) anesthesiologists, and 1520 (4.0%) intensivists at 3055 hospitals. The MIPS quality score was not associated with the hospital composite rate of postoperative complications. MIPS quality scores for vascular surgeons in the 11th to 25th percentile, compared with those in the 51st to 100th percentile, were associated with a 0.55-percentage point higher hospital rate of failure to rescue (95% CI, 0.06-1.04 percentage points; P = .03). MIPS quality scores for cardiac surgeons in the 1st to 10th percentile, compared with those in the 51st to 100th percentile, were associated with a 0.41-percentage point higher hospital coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) mortality rate (95% CI, 0.10-0.71 percentage points; P = .01). MIPS quality scores for cardiac surgeons in the 1st to 10th percentile and 11th to 25th percentile, compared with those in the 51st to 100th percentile, were associated with 0.65-percentage point (95% CI, 0.013-1.16 percentage points; P = .02) and 0.48-percentage point (95% CI, 0.07-0.90 percentage points; P = .02) higher hospital CABG readmission rates, respectively. Conclusions and Relevance: In this study, better performance on the physician MIPS quality score was associated with better hospital surgical outcomes for some physician specialties during the first year of MIPS.

Pulmonary complications in trauma: Another bellwether for failure to rescue?

BACKGROUND: Pulmonary complications are the most common adverse event after injury and second greatest cause of failure to rescue (death after pulmonary complications). It is not known whether readily accessible trauma center data can be used to stratify center-level performance for various complications. Performance variation between trauma centers would allow sharing of best practices among otherwise similar hospitals. We hypothesized that high-, average-, and low-performing centers for pulmonary complication and failure to rescue could be identified and that hospital factors associated with success and failure could be discovered. METHODS: Pennsylvania state trauma registry data (2007-2015) were abstracted for pulmonary complications. Burns and age <17 were excluded. Multivariable logistic regression models were developed for pulmonary complication and failure to rescue, using demographics, comorbidities, and injuries/physiology. Expected event rates were compared with observed rates to identify outliers. Center-level variables associated with outcomes of interest were taken from the American Hospital Association Annual Survey Database and assessed for inclusion. RESULTS: Included in the study were 283,121 patients (male [60%] blunt trauma [92%]). Of these patients, 3% (8,381 of 283,121) developed pulmonary complications (center-level range 0.18%-5.8%). The percentage of failure-to-rescue patients was 13.4% (1,120/8,381, center-level range 0.0%-22.6%). For pulmonary complications, 13 out of 27 centers were high performers (95% CI for O:E ratio <1) and 7 out of 27 were low (95% CI for an O:E ratio >1). For failure-to-rescue patients, 2 out of 27 centers were low performers and the remainder average. There was little concordance between performance for pulmonary complications and failure to rescue. Research programs, large non-teaching hospitals, those with advanced practice providers, and those with health maintenance organizations had reduced failure-to-rescue patients. CONCLUSION: Factors associated with complications were distinct from those affecting failure to rescue and center-level success in reducing complications often did not translate into success in preventing death once they occurred. Our data demonstrate that high- and low-performing centers and the factors driving success or failure are identifiable. This work serves as a guide for comparing practices and improving outcomes with readily available data.

Volume Standards for Open Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Repair Are Not Associated With Improved Clinical Outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Volume-outcome relationships exist for many complex surgical procedures, prompting institutions to adopt surgical volume standards for credentialing. The current Leapfrog Group Hospital volume standard for open abdominal aortic aneurysm repair (OAR) is 15 per year. However, this is primarily based on data from the 1990s and may not be appropriate given the dramatic decline in OAR. We sought to quantify the proportion of hospitals meeting volume standards, the difference in perioperative outcomes between low-volume and high-volume hospitals, and the potential travel burden of volume credentialing on patients. METHODS: We identified Medicare beneficiaries for individuals aged ≥65 years undergoing OAR in 2013-2014. Hospital "all-payer" annual volume was estimated based on the national proportion of patients undergoing OAR covered by Medicare in the Vascular Quality Initiative. Hospital annual OAR volume was characterized as <5/year, 5-9/year, 10-14/year, and ≥15/year (high volume). Adjusted rates of postoperative morbidity, reoperation, failure to rescue, and mortality in 2014 were compared across volume cohorts. Distance between patients' home zip code and high-volume hospitals was calculated. RESULTS: A total of 21,191 OARs were performed at 1,445 hospitals between 2013 and 2014. The average hospital OAR annual volume was 7.8 (standard deviation [SD] ± 9.3) with a median of 4.5. Among the 1,445 hospitals, only 190 (13.1%) performed ≥15 OARs per year whereas 756 hospitals (53.3%) performed <5 per year. Among patients who underwent OAR in 2014, 5,395 (53.3%) received care at a hospital that performed <15 per year. There was no difference in complication, reoperation, or failure to rescue rates between high-volume and low-volume hospitals. Mortality did not significantly differ among OAR volume cohorts. Hospitals performing <5 OARs per year had a mortality rate of 5.7% compared with 5.6% at high-volume hospitals (P = 0.817). One-quarter of patients who received care at a low-volume hospital would have had to travel more than 60 miles to reach a high-volume hospital. CONCLUSIONS: By conservative estimates, only 13% of hospitals performing OAR meet current volume standards. Triaging all patients to high-volume hospitals would require shifting over 5,000 patients annually with no associated improvement in perioperative outcomes. Implementation of the current OAR hospital volume standard may significantly burden patients and hospitals without improving surgical outcomes.

Watcher Initiative Associated With Decrease in Failure to Rescue Events in Pediatric Population.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Improved situation awareness may prevent unplanned ICU transfers. Transfers with serious safety issues may be classified as unrecognized situation awareness failure events (UNSAFE) and are associated with intubation, vasopressors, or >3 fluid boluses within 1 hour before or after ICU arrival. Our aim was to decrease the proportion of unplanned ICU transfers that met UNSAFE criteria by 50% in 1 year. METHODS: We adapted a previously described huddle-based intervention. In May 2015, we started a daily safety brief with hospital-wide representation; concurrently, nurses and residents separately identified watcher patients (ie, patients at risk for UNSAFE transfers) to be reported in the daily safety brief. Watcher patients frequently differed between the groups, so in July 2015, we started twice-daily watcher huddles on a pilot floor. During these huddles, nurses and residents jointly identified watcher patients on the basis of defined criteria and deployed mitigation plans. By March 2016, we implemented these huddles hospital-wide. We reviewed the electronic medical record to categorize all unplanned ICU transfers as safe or UNSAFE. Our outcome was the proportion of unplanned ICU transfers that met UNSAFE criteria. RESULTS: In the 16-month pre-intervention period, 49 of the 322 unplanned ICU transfers were UNSAFE (median 15.5%); in the 12-month post-intervention period, 13 of the 329 unplanned ICU transfers were UNSAFE (median 3%). These findings represent an 81% reduction in the proportion of UNSAFE transfers. CONCLUSIONS: Watcher huddles incorporated into the daily inpatient routine can significantly decrease UNSAFE transfers.