Hospital quality reporting and improvement in quality of care for patients with acute myocardial infarction.

BACKGROUND: Although public reporting of hospital performance is becoming common, it remains uncertain whether public reporting leads to improvement in clinical outcomes. This study was conducted to evaluate whether enrollment in a quality reporting project is associated with improvement in quality of care for patients with acute myocardial infarction. METHODS: We conducted a quasi-experimental study using hospital census survey and national inpatient database in Japan. Hospitals enrolled in a ministry-led quality reporting project were matched with non-reporting control hospitals by one-to-one propensity score matching using hospital characteristics. Using the inpatient data of acute myocardial infarction patients hospitalized in the matched hospitals during 2011-2013, difference-in-differences analyses were conducted to evaluate the changes in unadjusted and risk-adjusted in-hospital mortality rates over time that are attributable to intervention. RESULTS: Matching between hospitals created a cohort of 30,220 patients with characteristics similar between the 135 reporting and 135 non-reporting hospitals. Overall in-hospital mortality rates were 13.2% in both the reporting and non-reporting hospitals. There was no significant association between hospital enrollment in the quality reporting project and change over time in unadjusted mortality (OR, 0.98; 95% CI, 0.80-1.22). In 28,168 patients eligible for evaluation of risk-adjusted mortality, enrollment was also not associated with change in risk-adjusted mortality (OR, 0.98; 95% CI, 0.81-1.17). CONCLUSIONS: Enrollment in the quality reporting project was not associated with short-term improvement in quality of care for patients with acute myocardial infarction. Additional efforts may be necessary to improve quality of care.

Validity of diagnoses, procedures, and laboratory data in Japanese administrative data.

BACKGROUND: Validation of recorded data is a prerequisite for studies that utilize administrative databases. The present study evaluated the validity of diagnoses and procedure records in the Japanese Diagnosis Procedure Combination (DPC) data, along with laboratory test results in the newly-introduced Standardized Structured Medical Record Information Exchange (SS-MIX) data. METHODS: Between November 2015 and February 2016, we conducted chart reviews of 315 patients hospitalized between April 2014 and March 2015 in four middle-sized acute-care hospitals in Shizuoka, Kochi, Fukuoka, and Saga Prefectures and used them as reference standards. The sensitivity and specificity of DPC data in identifying 16 diseases and 10 common procedures were identified. The accuracy of SS-MIX data for 13 laboratory test results was also examined. RESULTS: The specificity of diagnoses in the DPC data exceeded 96%, while the sensitivity was below 50% for seven diseases and variable across diseases. When limited to primary diagnoses, the sensitivity and specificity were 78.9% and 93.2%, respectively. The sensitivity of procedure records exceeded 90% for six procedures, and the specificity exceeded 90% for nine procedures. Agreement between the SS-MIX data and the chart reviews was above 95% for all 13 items. CONCLUSION: The validity of diagnoses and procedure records in the DPC data and laboratory results in the SS-MIX data was high in general, supporting their use in future studies.