Identifying Population-Level and Within-Hospital Disparities in Surgical Care.

INTRODUCTION: The lack of consensus on equity measurement and its incorporation into quality-assessment programs at the hospital and system levels may be a barrier to addressing disparities in surgical care. This study aimed to identify population-level and within-hospital differences in the quality of surgical care provision. METHODS: The analysis included 657 National Surgical Quality Improvement Program participating hospitals with over 4 million patients (2014-2018). Multi-level random slope, random intercept modeling was used to examine for population-level and in-hospital disparities. Disparities in surgical care by Area Deprivation Index (ADI), race, and ethnicity were analyzed for five measures: all-case inpatient mortality, all-case urgent readmission, all-case postoperative surgical site infection, colectomy mortality, and spine surgery complications. RESULTS: Population-level disparities were identified across all measures by ADI, two measures for Black race (all-case readmissions and spine surgery complications), and none for Hispanic ethnicity. Disparities remained significant in the adjusted models. Prior to risk-adjustment, in all measures examined, within-hospital disparities were detected in: 25.8-99.8% of hospitals for ADI, 0-6.1% of hospitals for Black race, and 0-0.8% of hospitals for Hispanic ethnicity. Following risk-adjustment, in all measures examined, fewer than 1.1% of hospitals demonstrated disparities by ADI, race, or ethnicity. CONCLUSIONS: Following risk adjustment, very few hospitals demonstrated significant disparities in care. Disparities were more frequently detected by ADI than by race and ethnicity. The lack of substantial in-hospital disparities may be due to the use of postoperative metrics, small sample sizes, the risk adjustment methodology, and healthcare segregation. Further work should examine surgical access and healthcare segregation.

Development and Validation of a Novel Literature-Based Method to Identify Disparity-Sensitive Surgical Quality Metrics.

BACKGROUND: Disparity in surgical care impedes the delivery of uniformly high-quality care. Metrics that quantify disparity in care can help identify areas for needed intervention. A literature-based Disparity-Sensitive Score (DSS) system for surgical care was adapted by the Metrics for Equitable Access and Care in Surgery (MEASUR) group. The alignment between the MEASUR DSS and Delphi ratings of an expert advisory panel (EAP) regarding the disparity sensitivity of surgical quality metrics was assessed. STUDY DESIGN: Using DSS criteria MEASUR co-investigators scored 534 surgical metrics which were subsequently rated by the EAP. All scores were converted to a 9-point scale. Agreement between the new measurement technique (ie DSS) and an established subjective technique (ie importance and validity ratings) were assessed using the Bland-Altman method, adjusting for the linear relationship between the paired difference and the paired average. The limit of agreement (LOA) was set at 1.96 SD (95%). RESULTS: The percentage of DSS scores inside the LOA was 96.8% (LOA, 0.02 points) for the importance rating and 94.6% (LOA, 1.5 points) for the validity rating. In comparison, 94.4% of the 2 subjective EAP ratings were inside the LOA (0.7 points). CONCLUSIONS: Applying the MEASUR DSS criteria using available literature allowed for identification of disparity-sensitive surgical metrics. The results suggest that this literature-based method of selecting quality metrics may be comparable to more complex consensus-based Delphi methods. In fields with robust literature, literature-based composite scores may be used to select quality metrics rather than assembling consensus panels.

Disparity-Sensitive Measures in Surgical Care: A Delphi Panel Consensus.

BACKGROUND: In the US, disparities in surgical care impede the delivery of uniformly high-quality care to all patients. There is a lack of disparity-sensitive measures related to surgical care. The American College of Surgeons Metrics for Equitable Access and Care in Surgery group, through research and expert consensus, aimed to identify disparity-sensitive measures in surgical care. STUDY DESIGN: An environmental scan, systematic literature review, and subspecialty society surveys were conducted to identify potential disparity-sensitive surgical measures. A modified Delphi process was conducted where panelists rated measures on both importance and validity. In addition, a novel literature-based disparity-sensitive scoring process was used. RESULTS: We identified 841 potential disparity-sensitive surgical measures. From these, our Delphi and literature-based approaches yielded a consensus list of 125 candidate disparity-sensitive measures. These measures were rated as both valid and important and were supported by the existing literature. CONCLUSION: There are profound disparities in surgical care within the US healthcare system. A multidisciplinary Delphi panel identified 125 potential disparity-sensitive surgical measures that could be used to track health disparities, evaluate the impact of focused interventions, and reduce healthcare inequity.

African American church participation and health care practices.

BACKGROUND: While religious involvement is associated with improvements in health, little is known about the relationship between church participation and health care practices. OBJECTIVES: To determine 1) the prevalence of church participation; 2) whether church participation influences positive health care practices; and 3) whether gender, age, insurance status, and levels of comorbidity modified these relationships. DESIGN: A cross-sectional analysis using survey data from 2196 residents of a low-income, African-American neighborhood. MEASUREMENTS: Our independent variable measured the frequency of church attendance. Dependent variables were: 1) Pap smear; 2) mammogram; and 3) dental visit-all taking place within 2 years; 4) blood pressure measurement within 1 year, 5) having a regular source of care, and 6) no perceived delays in care in the previous year. We controlled for socioeconomic factors and the number of comorbid conditions and also tested for interactions. RESULTS: Thirty-seven percent of community members went to church at least monthly. Church attendance was associated with increased likelihood of positive health care practices by 20% to 80%. In multivariate analyses, church attendance was related to dental visits (odds ratio [OR], 1.5; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.3 to 1.9) and blood pressure measurements (OR, 1.6; 95% CI, 1.2 to 2.1). Insurance status and number of comorbid conditions modified the relationship between church attendance and Pap smear, with increased practices noted for the uninsured (OR, 2.3; 95% CI, 1.2 to 4.1) and for women with 2 or more comorbid conditions (OR, 1.9; 95% CI, 1.1 to 3.5). CONCLUSION: Church attendance is an important correlate of positive health care practices, especially for the most vulnerable subgroups, the uninsured and chronically ill. Community- and faith-based organizations present additional opportunities to improve the health of low-income and minority populations.

Ambulatory patient safety. What we know and need to know.

While safety risks are widespread in ambulatory settings, there has been insufficient attention directed at developing the evidence base that is needed to improve ambulatory safety. In this article, the current state of knowledge about ambulatory safety is reviewed. A research agenda in ambulatory safety is proposed, as well as a series of potential interventions that could be used to improve safety in the ambulatory setting.