Gaps in standardized postoperative pain management quality measures: A systematic review.

BACKGROUND: The goal of this study was an assessment of availability postoperative pain management quality measures and National Quality Forum-endorsed measures. Postoperative pain is an important clinical timepoint because poor pain control can lead to patient suffering, chronic opiate use, and/or chronic pain. Quality measures can guide best practices, but it is unclear whether there are measures for managing pain after surgery. METHODS: The National Quality Forum Quality Positioning System, Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality Indicators, and Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services Measures Inventory Tool databases were searched in November 2019. We conducted a systematic literature review to further identify quality measures in research publications, clinical practice guidelines, and gray literature for the period between March 11, 2015 and March 11, 2020. RESULTS: Our systematic review yielded 1,328 publications, of which 206 were pertinent. Nineteen pain management quality measures were identified from the quality measure databases, and 5 were endorsed by National Quality Forum. The National Quality Forum measures were not specific to postoperative pain management. Three of the non-endorsed measures were specific to postoperative pain. CONCLUSION: The dearth of published postoperative pain management quality measures, especially National Quality Forum-endorsed measures, highlights the need for more rigorous evidence and widely endorsed postoperative pain quality measures to guide best practices.

Postoperative respiratory failure: An update on the validity of the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality Patient Safety Indicator 11 in an era of clinical documentation improvement programs.

BACKGROUND: Administrative data can be used to identify cases of postoperative respiratory failure (PRF). We aimed to determine if recent changes to the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality Patient Safety Indicator 11 (PSI 11) and adoption of clinical documentation improvement programs have improved the validity of PSI 11. We also analyzed reasons why PSI 11 was falsely triggered. STUDY DESIGN: Cross-sectional study of all eligible discharges using health record data from five academic medical centers between October 1, 2012 and September 30, 2015. RESULTS: Of 437 flagged records, 434 (99.3%) were accurately coded and 414 (94.7%) represented true clinical PRF. None of the false positive records involved respiratory failure present on admission. Most (78.3%) false positive records required airway protection but did not have respiratory failure. CONCLUSION: The validity of PSI 11 has improved with recent changes to the code criterion and adoption of clinical documentation improvement programs.

Adverse Safety Event Characteristics and Predictive Factors in Hospital Encounters for Patients with Chronic Kidney Disease.

BACKGROUND: Adverse safety events (ASE) during hospitalization may contribute to renal decline or poor outcomes. Understanding factors contributing to ASE in chronic kidney disease (CKD) is limited. The objective is to compare differences and determine predictors of renal pertinent ASE in discharges for CKD. METHOD: A cross-sectional analysis of the National Inpatient Sample, Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project, Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality 2012 data. The study included adults age ≥18 years with discharge diagnosis for CKD stages 1-4, excluding cancer of the kidney and renal pelvis, renal transplant, end-stage renal disease. Predictors included study sample characteristics, including patient demographics, comorbidity, and hospitalization-related variables. Outcomes assessed included distribution of ASE (angioedema, confusion, muscle weakness or cramps, lower extremity edema (LEE), falls, hypoglycemia, nausea-vomiting-diarrhea (NVD), and skin rash), mean total charge per hospital event, and length-of-stay. The analytical approach used descriptive statistics (means and proportions) and bivariate analysis to compare differences (ASE versus none). Predictors of ASE were explored using multivariate logistic regression. RESULTS: 10.3% of inpatient discharges for CKD showed an ASE. Mean charges (USD 48,072 vs. 46,996), days length-of-stay (6.8 vs. 5.7), number of diagnosis on record (6.8 vs. 5.7), geographical region (Midwest, and West), and type of hospital (rural) were significantly associated with ASE. Most common ASEs were confusion (18%), LEE (21.3%), and NVD (50.7%). Odds of ASE increased for age, female gender, rural hospitals, geographical region, and diagnosis for anemia, coagulopathies, depression, fluid and electrolyte disorders, neurological disorders, psychoses, and weight loss. CONCLUSIONS: We identified key factors that increase the risk of ASE in patients with CKD. Opportunities exist to reduce ASE in CKD.

Incidence and morbidity of craniocervical arterial dissections in atraumatic subarachnoid hemorrhage patients who underwent aneurysmal repair.

BACKGROUND: No studies have assessed the incidence of craniocervical arterial dissections (CCADs) and its association to mortality in hospitalized patients with a primary diagnosis of atraumatic subarachnoid hemorrhage (SAH) requiring aneurysmal repair. We hypothesize that the incidence of CCADs in these patients has increased over time as well as its association to mortality. METHODS: We conducted a 9 year retrospective assessment of the incidence of CCADs in patients hospitalized with a primary diagnosis of an SAH requiring repair and the effect of CCAD on mortality. Using the Nationwide Inpatient Sample (NIS), we queried records from 2003 to 2011 for an ICD-9 (International Classification of Diseases-9) code corresponding to admissions for atraumatic SAH. Demographical data, incidence of CCADs, type of aneurysmal repair, length of hospital stay, and hospital mortality were recorded. Multivariate logistical regression models were fitted to assess for the impact of CCAD on inhospital mortality and morbidity. RESULTS: During the period 2003-2011, of the NIS reported 18,260 patients who required aneurysmal SAH repair, 9737 (53.32%) underwent endovascular coiling and 8523 (46.48%) had surgical clipping. There were 131 patients in the cohort with reported CCADs: 94 (71.75%) of these patients had received endovascular coiling repair and 37 (28.25%) had undergone surgical clipping repair. Patients who underwent endovascular coiling had a higher rate of CCADs in this cohort (OR 2.94; 95% CI 2.00 to 4.31, p<0.0001). The incidence of CCADs in this population increased by an average rate of 9.4% per year (OR 1.14; 95% CI 1.06 to 1.23, p<0.0006), from 0.49% in 2003 to 1.10% in 2011. The diagnosis of CCAD added 3 and 6 more days to median length of hospitalization stay for surgical clipping and endovascular coiling, respectively. The unadjusted rate of mortality was 8.4% in the CCADs subgroup, and the presence of CCAD was not a predictor of mortality in our multivariate regression model (OR 0.68; 95% CI 0.36 to 1.27, p=0.2244). CONCLUSIONS: Our study indicates an annual increase in the incidence of CCADs in patients admitted with SAH who require aneurysmal repair. More than two-thirds of these patients that developed CCADs had undergone endovascular coiling repair. A diagnosis of CCAD increased the length of hospital stay but had no statistically significant association with mortality in this patient population.

Burden of illness for osteoporotic fractures compared with other serious diseases among postmenopausal women in the United States.

OBJECTIVES: To provide a national estimate of the incidence of hospitalizations due to osteoporotic fractures (OFs) in women; compare this with the incidence of myocardial infarction (MI), stroke, and breast cancer; and assess temporal trends in the incidence and length of hospitalizations. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The study included all women 55 years and older at the time of admission, admitted to a hospital participating in the US Nationwide Inpatient Sample for an outcome of interest. We performed a retrospective analysis of hospitalizations for OFs (hip, forearm, spine, pelvis, distal femur, wrist, and humerus), MI, stroke, or breast cancer, using the US Nationwide Inpatient Sample, 2000-2011. RESULTS: From 2000 to 2011, there were 4.9 million hospitalizations for OF, 2.9 million for MI, 3.0 million for stroke, and 0.7 million for breast cancer. Osteoporotic fractures accounted for more than 40% of the hospitalizations in these 4 outcomes, with an age-adjusted rate of 1124 admissions per 100,000 person-years. In comparison, MI, stroke, and breast cancer had age-adjusted incidence rates of 668, 687, and 151 admissions per 100,000 person-years, respectively. The annual total population facility-related hospital cost was highest for hospitalizations due to OFs ($5.1 billion), followed by MI ($4.3 billion), stroke ($3.0 billion), and breast cancer ($0.5 billion). CONCLUSION: These data provide evidence that in US women 55 years and older, the hospitalization burden of OFs and population facility-related hospital cost is greater than that of MI, stroke, or breast cancer. Prioritization of bone health and supporting programs such as fracture liaison services is needed to reduce this substantial burden.

Inpatient cancer treatment: an analysis of financial and nonfinancial performance measures by hospital-ownership type.

This study uses longitudinal data of inpatient treatment from the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality's (AHRQ's) Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project (HCUP) to examine the differences in historical trends and build future projections of charges, costs, and lengths of stay (LOS) for inpatient treatment of four of the most prevalent cancer types: breast, colon, lung, and prostate. We stratify our data by hospital ownership type and for the aforementioned four major cancer types. We use the Kruskal Wallis (nonparametric ANOVA) Test and time series models to analyze variance and build projections, respectively, for mean charges per discharge, mean costs per discharge, mean LOS per discharge, mean charges per day, and mean costs per day. We find that significant differences exist in both the mean charges per discharge and mean charges per day for breast, colon, lung, and prostate cancers and in the mean LOS per discharge for breast cancer. Additionally, we find that both mean charges and mean costs are forecast to continue increasing while mean LOS are forecast to continue decreasing over the forecast period 2008 to 2012. The methodologies we employ may be used by individual hospital systems, and by health care policy-makers, for various financial planning purposes. Future studies could examine additional financial and nonfinancial variables for these and other cancer types, test for geographic disparities, or focus on procedural-level hospital measures.

Application of AHRQ patient safety indicators to English hospital data.

BACKGROUND: Patient safety is recognised worldwide as a major healthcare issue. The US Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality developed a series of evidence-based Patient Safety Indicators for use with hospital administrative data, but to date these have not been translated for use in the UK. They measure harm due to treatment and include infections, obstetric tears and foreign bodies left in the patient following surgery. We aimed to apply 10 of the AHRQ indicators for use in English routine hospital admissions data as the first step in validation, and describe their rates in relation to established measures of negative outcome such as mortality. METHODS: Translation of US coding systems into England systems using look-up files and clinical coding advice. Descriptive analysis of rates, length of stay, mortality and emergency readmission. Qualitative feedback from hospitals on their rates and level of interest in the indicators. RESULTS: The translation presented a number of challenges, particularly regarding the lack of direct correspondence between the two procedure coding systems. There were a total of 35,918 potential adverse events among the nine successfully translated indicators in England in the financial year 2005/6, with wide variation between hospital trusts. Potential adverse events were usually associated with higher mortality and unplanned readmission rates and longer length of stay. Postoperative sepsis, for example, had a rate of 4.2 per 1000 admissions and was associated with a median length of stay of 19 days compared with 6 days for admissions for operations without sepsis recorded, and was associated with a mortality of 14.7% compared with 0.5%. CONCLUSIONS: These indicators have potential for use in tracking progress in harm-reducing programmes, but prospective evaluation of data quality and coding practices is required to fully assess their utility.

A comparison of hospital adverse events identified by three widely used detection methods.

OBJECTIVE: Determine the degree of congruence between several measures of adverse events. DESIGN: Cross-sectional study to assess frequency and type of adverse events identified using a variety of methods. SETTING: Mayo Clinic Rochester hospitals. PARTICIPANTS: All inpatients discharged in 2005 (n = 60 599). INTERVENTIONS: Adverse events were identified through multiple methods: (i) Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality-defined patient safety indicators (PSIs) using ICD-9 diagnosis codes from administrative discharge abstracts, (ii) provider-reported events, and (iii) Institute for Healthcare Improvement Global Trigger Tool with physician confirmation. PSIs were adjusted to exclude patient conditions present at admission. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Agreement of identification between methods. RESULTS: About 4% (2401) of hospital discharges had an adverse event identified by at least one method. Around 38% (922) of identified events were provider-reported events. Nearly 43% of provider-reported adverse events were skin integrity events, 23% medication events, 21% falls, 1.8% equipment events and 37% miscellaneous events. Patients with adverse events identified by one method were not usually identified using another method. Only 97 (6.2%) of hospitalizations with a PSI also had a provider-reported event and only 10.5% of provider-reported events had a PSI. CONCLUSIONS: Different detection methods identified different adverse events. Findings are consistent with studies that recommend combining approaches to measure patient safety for internal quality improvement. Potential reported adverse event inconsistencies, low association with documented harm and reporting differences across organizations, however, raise concerns about using these patient safety measures for public reporting and organizational performance comparison.