Assessment and prevention of hypoglycaemia in primary care among U.S. Veterans: a mixed methods study.

Background: Hypoglycaemia from diabetes treatment causes morbidity and lower quality of life, and prevention should be routinely addressed in clinical visits. Methods: This mixed methods study evaluated how primary care providers (PCPs) assess for and prevent hypoglycaemia by analyzing audio-recorded visits from five Veterans Affairs medical centres in the US. Two investigators independently coded visit dialogue to classify discussions of hypoglycaemia history, anticipatory guidance, and adjustments to hypoglycaemia-causing medications according to diabetes guidelines. Findings: There were 242 patients (one PCP visit per patient) and 49 PCPs. Two thirds of patients were treated with insulin and 40% with sulfonylureas. Hypoglycaemia history was discussed in 78/242 visits (32%). PCPs provided hypoglycaemia anticipatory guidance in 50 visits (21%) that focused on holding diabetes medications while fasting and carrying glucose tabs; avoiding driving and glucagon were not discussed. Hypoglycaemia-causing medications were de-intensified or adjusted more often (p < 0.001) when the patient reported a history of hypoglycaemia (15/51 visits, 29%) than when the patient reported no hypoglycaemia or it was not discussed (6/191 visits, 3%). Haemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) was not associated with diabetes medication adjustment, and only 5/12 patients (42%) who reported hypoglycaemia with HbA1c <7.0% had medications de-intensified or adjusted. Interpretation: PCPs discussed hypoglycaemia in one-third of visits for at-risk patients and provided limited hypoglycaemia anticipatory guidance. De-intensifying or adjusting hypoglycaemia-causing medications did not occur routinely after reported hypoglycaemia with HbA1c <7.0%. Routine hypoglycaemia assessment and provision of diabetes self-management education are needed to achieve guideline-concordant hypoglycaemia prevention. Funding: U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs and National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (NIDDK).

Early Impact of VA MISSION Act Implementation on Primary Care Appointment Wait Time.

BACKGROUND: Through Community Care Networks (CCNs) implemented with the VA MISSION Act, VA expanded provider contracting and instituted network adequacy standards for Veterans' community care. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether early CCN implementation impacted community primary care (PC) appointment wait times overall, and by rural/urban and PC shortage area (HPSA) status. DESIGN: Using VA administrative data from February 2019 through February 2020 and a difference-in-differences approach, we compared wait times before and after CCN implementation for appointments scheduled by VA facilities that did (CCN appointments) and did not (comparison appointments) implement CCNs. We ran regression models with all appointments, and stratified by rural/urban and PC HPSA status. All models adjusted for Veteran characteristics and VA facility-level clustering. APPOINTMENTS: 13,720 CCN and 40,638 comparison appointments. MAIN MEASURES: Wait time, measured as number of days from authorization to use community PC to a Veteran's first corresponding appointment. KEY RESULTS: Overall, unadjusted wait times increased by 35.7 days ([34.4, 37.1] 95% CI) after CCN implementation. In adjusted analysis, comparison wait times increased on average 33.7 days ([26.3, 41.2] 95% CI, p < 0.001) after CCN implementation; there was no significant difference for CCN wait times (across-group mean difference: 5.4 days, [-3.8, 14.6] 95% CI, p = 0.25). In stratified analyses, comparison wait time increases ranged from 29.6 days ([20.8, 38.4] 95% CI, p < 0.001) to 42.1 days ([32.9, 51.3] 95% CI, p > 0.001) after CCN implementation, while additional differences for CCN appointments ranged from 13.4 days ([3.5, 23.4] 95% CI, p = 0.008) to -15.1 days ([-30.1, -0.1] 95% CI, p = 0.05) for urban and PC HPSA appointments, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: After early CCN implementation, community PC wait times increased sharply at VA facilities that did and did not implement CCNs, regardless of rural/urban or PC HPSA status, suggesting community care demand likely overwhelmed VA resources such that CCNs had limited impact.

An assessment of Veterans attitudes and willingness to receiving the COVID-19 vaccine: a mixed methods study.

BACKGROUND: While several safe and effective COVID-19 vaccines have been available since December 2020, many eligible individuals choose to remain unvaccinated. This vaccine hesitancy is an important factor affecting our ability to combat the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: The objective of the study was to examine the attitudes and willingness among US Veterans toward receiving COVID-19 vaccination. The study used a quantitative qualitative mixed methods design with a telephone survey and then in-depth interviews in a subset of those surveyed. Participants were unvaccinated Veterans (N = 184) selected randomly from a registry of patients who had received VA healthcare during the pandemic and had a diagnostic test for COVID-19. The primary outcome was willingness to accept COVID-19 vaccination. Survey data collection and in-depth interviews were conducted by telephone. Analyses of the survey data compared the primary outcome with demographics, clinical data, and survey responses using bivariate and multiple regression analyses. A subset (N = 10) of those surveyed, participated in an in-depth interview. Interview transcripts were analyzed to derive themes using qualitative content analysis. RESULTS: Almost 40% of participants disagreed they would receive a COVID-19 vaccine. Participants who were younger, female, and had fewer comorbid conditions were more likely (P < 0.05) to disagree with COVID-19 vaccination. In multiple regression analysis, willingness to accept vaccination was associated with reliance on a doctor or family member's recommendation and with a belief that vaccines are effective. In-depth interviews revealed several barriers to COVID-19 vaccination, including lack of trust in the government and vaccine manufacturers, concerns about the speed of vaccine development, fear of side effects, and fear the vaccine was a tool of racism. CONCLUSIONS: This study illustrates the complexity of patients' deliberation about COVID-19 vaccination and may help physicians and other health care providers understand patients' perspectives about COVID-19 vaccination. The results highlight the importance of patients' trust in physicians, healthcare organizations, pharmaceutical manufacturers and the government when making health decisions.

Health Insurance Coverage Among Veterans Receiving Care From VA Health Care Facilities.

Reasons for acquiring insurance outside Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) health care coverage among VA enrollees are incompletely understood. To assess Veterans' decision-making and acquisition of non-VA health care insurance in the Affordable Care Act era, we used mailed questionnaires and semistructured interviews in a stratified random sample of VA enrollees <65 years in the Midwest. Of the 3,666 survey participants, 32.1% reported non-VA insurance. Frequently reported reasons included wanting coverage for emergency situations or family members. Those without non-VA insurance cited unaffordability as the main obstacle. Analysis of the semistructured interview data revealed similar findings. In multivariable logistic regression analyses, characteristics associated with non-VA insurance included higher income (>$50,000 vs. <$10,000, odds ratio [OR] = 5.95, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 3.45-10.3, p < .001). As financial barriers exist for acquisition of non-VA insurance and hence community care, it is critically important that VA enrollees' health care needs are met through VA or community providers financed through VA.

Veterans' Use of Veterans Health Administration Primary Care in an Era of Expanding Choice.

BACKGROUND: The Veterans Choice Program (VCP), aimed at improving access to care, included expanded options for Veterans to receive primary care through community providers. OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study was to characterize and compare Veterans use of Veterans Health Administration (VA) primary care services at VA facilities and through a VA community care network (VA-CCN) provider. RESEARCH DESIGN: This was a retrospective, observational over fiscal years (FY) 2015-2018. SUBJECTS: Veterans receiving primary care services paid for by the VA. MEASURES: Veteran demographic, socioeconomic and clinical factors and use of VA primary care services under the VCP each year. RESULTS: There were 6.3 million Veterans with >54 million VA primary care visits, predominantly (98.5% of visits) at VA facility. The proportion of VA-CCN visits increased in absolute terms from 0.7% in 2015 to 2.6% in 2018. Among Veterans with any VA-CCN primary care, the proportion of VA-CCN visits increased from 22.6% to 55.3%. Logistic regression indicated that Veterans who were female, lived in rural areas, had a driving distance >40 miles, had health insurance or had a psychiatric/depression condition were more likely to receive VA-CCN primary care. Veterans who were older, identified as Black race, required to pay VA copayments, or had a higher Nosos score, were less likely to receive VA-CCN primary care. CONCLUSION: As the VA transitions from the VCP to MISSION and VA facilities gain experience under the new contracts, attention to factors that impact Veterans' use of primary care services in different settings are important to monitor to identify access barriers and to ensure Veterans' health care needs are met.

Veterans Affairs Providers' Beliefs About the Contributors to and Responsibility for Reducing Racial and Ethnic Health Care Disparities.

Purpose: Providers' beliefs about the causes of disparities and the entities responsible for addressing these disparities are important in designing disparity-reduction interventions aimed at providers. This secondary analysis of a larger study is aimed at evaluating perceptions of providers regarding the underlying causes of racial health care disparities and their views of who is responsible for reducing them. Methods: We surveyed 232 providers at 3 Veterans Affairs (VA) Medical Centers. Results: Sixty-nine percent of participants believed that minority patients in the United States receive lower quality health care. Most participants (64%) attributed differences in quality of care for minority patients in the VA health care system primarily to patients' socioeconomic status, followed by patient behavior (43%) and provider behaviors (33%). In contrast, most participants believed that the VA and other health care organizations (75%) and providers (70%) bear the responsibility for reducing disparities, while less than half (45%) believed that patients were responsible. Among provider-level contributors to disparities, providers' poor communication was the most widely endorsed (48%), while differences in prescribing of medications (13%) and in provision of specialty referrals (12%) were the least endorsed. Conclusions: Although most providers in the study did not believe that providers contribute to disparities, they do believe that they, along with health care organizations, have the responsibility to help reduce them. Interventions might focus on directly offering providers concrete ways that they can help reduce disparities, rather than focusing on simply raising awareness about disparities and their contributions to them.

Healthcare Providers' Responses to Narrative Communication About Racial Healthcare Disparities.

We used qualitative methods (semi-structured interviews with healthcare providers) to explore: 1) the role of narratives as a vehicle for raising awareness and engaging providers about the issue of healthcare disparities and 2) the extent to which different ways of framing issues of race within narratives might lead to message acceptance for providers' whose preexisting beliefs about causal attributions might predispose them to resist communication about racial healthcare disparities. Individual interviews were conducted with 53 providers who had completed a prior survey assessing beliefs about disparities. Participants were stratified by the degree to which they believed providers contributed to healthcare inequality: low provider attribution (LPA) versus high provider attribution (HPA). Each participant read and discussed two differently framed narratives about race in healthcare. All participants accepted the "Provider Success" narratives, in which interpersonal barriers involving a patient of color were successfully resolved by the provider narrator, through patient-centered communication. By contrast, "Persistent Racism" narratives, in which problems faced by the patient of color were more explicitly linked to racism and remained unresolved, were very polarizing, eliciting acceptance from HPA participants and resistance from LPA participants. This study provides a foundation for and raises questions about how to develop effective narrative communication strategies to engage providers in efforts to reduce healthcare disparities.

Communicating with providers about racial healthcare disparities: The role of providers' prior beliefs on their receptivity to different narrative frames.

OBJECTIVE: Evaluate narratives aimed at motivating providers with different pre-existing beliefs to address racial healthcare disparities. METHODS: Survey experiment with 280 providers. Providers were classified as high or low in attributing disparities to providers (HPA versus LPA) and were randomly assigned to a non-narrative control or 1 of 2 narratives: "Provider Success" (provider successfully resolved problem involving Black patient) and "Provider Bias" (Black patient experienced racial bias, which remained unresolved). Participants' reactions to narratives (including identification with narrative) and likelihood of participating in disparities-reduction activities were immediately assessed. Four weeks later, participation in those activities was assessed, including self-reported participation in a disparities-reduction training course (primary outcome). RESULTS: Participation in training was higher among providers randomized to the Provider Success narrative compared to Provider Bias or Control. LPA participants had higher identification with Provider Success than Provider Bias narratives, whereas among HPA participants, differences in identification between the narratives were not significant. CONCLUSIONS: Provider Success narratives led to greater participation in training than Provider Bias narratives, although providers' pre-existing beliefs influenced the narrative they identified with. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Provider Success narratives may be more effective at motivating providers to address disparities than Provider Bias narratives, though more research is needed.

Content counts, but context makes the difference in developing expertise: a qualitative study of how residents learn end of shift handoffs.

BACKGROUND: Handoff education is both formal and informal and varies widely across medical school and residency training programs. Despite many efforts to improve clinical handoffs, little evidence has shown meaningful improvement. The objective of this study was to identify residents' perspectives and develop a deeper understanding on the necessary training to conduct safe and effective patient handoffs. METHODS: A qualitative study focused on the analysis of cognitive task interviews targeting end-of-shift handoff experiences with 35 residents from three geographically dispersed VA facilities. The interview data were analyzed using an iterative, consensus-based team approach. Researchers discussed and agreed on code definitions and corresponding case examples. Grounded theory was used to analyze the transcripts. RESULTS: Although some residents report receiving formal training in conducting handoffs (e.g., medical school coursework, resident boot camp/workshops, and handoff debriefing), many residents reported that they were only partially prepared for enacting them as interns. Experiential, practice-based learning (i.e., giving handoffs, covering night shift to match common issues to handoff content) was identified as the most suited and beneficial for delivering effective handoff training. Six skills were described as critical to learning effective handoffs: identifying pertinent information, providing anticipatory guidance, applying acquired clinical knowledge, being concise, incorporating delivery strategies, and appreciating the styles/preferences of handoff recipients. CONCLUSIONS: Residents identified the immersive performance and the experience of covering night shifts as the most important aspects of learning to execute effective handoffs. Formal education alone can miss the critical role of real-time sense-making throughout the process of handing off from one trainee to another. Interventions targeting senior resident mentoring and night shift could positively influence the cognitive and performance capacity for safe, effective handoffs.

Mental Health Screening Results Associated with Women Veterans' Ratings of Provider Communication, Trust, and Care Quality.

BACKGROUND: Identifying factors influencing patient experience and communication with their providers is crucial for tailoring comprehensive primary care for women veterans within the Veterans Health Administration. In particular, the impact of mental health (MH) conditions that are highly prevalent among women veterans is unknown. METHODS: From January to March 2015, we conducted a cross-sectional survey of women veterans with three or more primary care and/or women's health visits in the prior year at 12 Veterans Health Administration sites. Patient measures included ratings of provider communication, trust in provider, and care quality; demographics, health status, health care use; and brief screeners for symptoms of depression, anxiety, and posttraumatic stress disorder. We used multivariate models to analyze associations of patient ratings and characteristics. RESULTS: Among the 1,395 participants, overall communication ratings were high, but significant variations were observed among women screening positive for MH conditions. In multivariate models, high communication ratings were less likely among women screening positive for multiple MH conditions compared with patients screening negative (odds ratio, 0.43; p < .001). High trust in their provider and high care ratings were significantly less likely among women with positive MH screens. Controlling for communication, the effect of MH on trust and care ratings became less significant, whereas the effect of communication remained highly significant. CONCLUSIONS: Women veterans screening positive for MH conditions were less likely to give high ratings for provider communication, trust, and care quality. Given the high prevalence of MH comorbidity among women veterans, it is important to raise provider awareness about these differences, and to enhance communication with patients with MH symptoms in primary care.

What Causes Racial Health Care Disparities? A Mixed-Methods Study Reveals Variability in How Health Care Providers Perceive Causal Attributions.

Progress to address health care equity requires health care providers' commitment, but their engagement may depend on their perceptions of the factors contributing to inequity. To understand providers' perceptions of causes of racial health care disparities, a short survey was delivered to health care providers who work at 3 Veterans Health Administration sites, followed by qualitative interviews (N = 53). Survey data indicated that providers attributed the causes of disparities to social and economic conditions more than to patients' or providers' behaviors. Qualitative analysis revealed differences in the meaning that participants ascribed to these causal factors. Participants who believed providers contribute to disparities discussed race and racism more readily, identified the mechanisms through which disparities emerge, and contextualized patient-level factors more than those who believed providers contributed less to disparities. Differences in provider understanding of the underlying causal factors suggest a multidimensional approach to engage providers in health equity efforts.

Weight and Veterans' Environments Study (WAVES) I and II: Rationale, Methods, and Cohort Characteristics.

PURPOSE: To present the rationale, methods, and cohort characteristics for 2 complementary "big data" studies of residential environment contributions to body weight, metabolic risk, and weight management program participation and effectiveness. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort. SETTING: Continental United States. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 3 261 115 veterans who received Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) health care in 2009 to 2014, including 169 910 weight management program participants and a propensity score-derived comparison group. INTERVENTION: The VA MOVE! weight management program, an evidence-based lifestyle intervention. MEASURES: Body mass index, metabolic risk measures, and MOVE! participation; residential environmental attributes (eg, food outlet availability and walkability); and MOVE! program characteristics. ANALYSIS: Descriptive statistics presented on cohort characteristics and environments where they live. RESULTS: Forty-four percent of men and 42.8% of women were obese, whereas 4.9% of men and 9.9% of women engaged in MOVE!. About half of the cohort had at least 1 supermarket within 1 mile of their home, whereas they averaged close to 4 convenience stores (3.6 for men, 3.9 for women) and 8 fast-food restaurants (7.9 for men, 8.2 for women). Forty-one percent of men and 38.6% of women did not have a park, and 35.5% of men and 31.3% of women did not have a commercial fitness facility within 1 mile. CONCLUSION: Drawing on a large nationwide cohort residing in diverse environments, these studies are poised to significantly inform policy and weight management program design.

A Mixed-Methods Study of Veterans Affairs Providers' Experiences Communicating With Patients About the Affordable Care Act.

OBJECTIVE: The provisions under the Affordable Care Act (ACA) can potentially increase insurance options for Veterans. Veterans must be informed about their options, and potential benefits and challenges associated with use of multiple health care systems. This study aimed to assess VA providers' perceptions of how they contributed to Veterans' health care decision-making within the health care context established by the ACA. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A mixed-methods approach including an online survey and semi-structured interviews was used to assess the experiences of health care providers (e.g., physicians, nurses, and social workers) communicating with Veterans about the ACA. Closed-ended survey questions were analyzed using descriptive statistics. Qualitative analysis of open-ended responses to the survey and semi-structured interview entailed thematic analysis, which involved identifying themes and patterns within and across participants until reaching saturation. RESULTS: A total of 251 providers completed the survey (20% response rate), and 26 providers completed a semi-structured interview (23% participation rate). Most providers (75.3%) reported being only "a little" or "somewhat" knowledgeable about the overall provisions of the ACA, and 90.8% of providers reported needing more information about the ACA. Key themes that emerged from the qualitative analyses included a variety of issues related to the ACA. According to providers, Veterans raised concerns about: signing up for the ACA, retaining VA benefits, knowledge about VA benefits and the ACA, understanding implications of insurance coverage through the ACA, and affordability of the ACA. Providers expressed the need for provider and patient educational resources. CONCLUSION: Our findings suggest that Veterans and their providers encounter challenges comprehending recent policy changes and navigating ongoing dual health care use. According to providers, Veterans' knowledge about the ACA can affect their ability to make informed health care decisions. Equipping patients and providers with more information about the ACA, and promoting communication between patients and providers may foster shared decision-making processes with regard to health care and treatment options. Strategies to improve knowledge transfer and patient-provider communication about policy changes warrant further investigation.

Influence of Raman scattering on the light field in natural waters: a simple assessment.

A simple, surprisingly accurate, method for estimating the influence of Raman scattering on the upwelling light field in natural waters is developed. The method is based on the single (or quasi-single) scattering solution of the radiative transfer equation with the Raman source function. Given the light field at the excitation wavelength, accurate estimates (~1-10%) of the contribution of Raman scattering to the light field at the emission wavelength are obtained. The accuracy is only slightly degraded when typically measured aspects of the light field at the excitation are available.

A brief self-affirmation study to improve the experience of minority patients.

BACKGROUND: There is evidence that Black patients may experience stereotype threat--apprehension about being negatively stereotyped--in healthcare settings, which might adversely affect their behavior in clinical encounters. Recent studies conducted outside of healthcare have shown that a brief self-affirmation intervention, in which individuals are asked to focus on and affirm their valued characteristics and sources of personal pride, can reduce the negative effects of stereotype threat on academic performance and on interpersonal communication. METHODS: This randomised controlled trial examined whether a self-affirmation (SA) intervention would decrease the negative effects of stereotype threat (negative mood, lower state self-esteem, greater perceptions of racial discrimination) and increase communication self-efficacy among Black primary care patients. Self-affirmation was induced by having patients complete a 32-item values affirmation questionnaire. RESULTS: Patients in the SA condition had lower levels of performance self-esteem and social self-esteem than patients in the control. There were no differences between the SA and the control groups on negative mood, communication self-efficacy, and perceptions of discrimination. CONCLUSIONS: Our SA intervention lowered state self-esteem among Black patients. Future research is needed to determine the type of SA task that is most effective for this population.

Physicians' communication and perceptions of patients: is it how they look, how they talk, or is it just the doctor?

Although physicians' communication style and perceptions affect outcomes, few studies have examined how these perceptions relate to the way physicians communicate with patients. Moreover, while any number of factors may affect the communication process, few studies have analyzed these effects collectively in order to identify the most powerful influences on physician communication and perceptions. Adopting an ecological approach, this investigation examined: (a) the relationships of physicians' patient-centered communication (informative, supportive, partnership-building) and affect (positive, contentious) on their perceptions of the patient, and (b) the degree to which communication and perceptions were affected by the physicians' characteristics, patients' demographic characteristics, physician-patient concordance, and the patient's communication. Physicians (N=29) and patients (N=207) from 10 outpatient settings in the United States participated in the study. From audio-recordings of these visits, coders rated the physicians' communication and affect as well as the patients' participation and affect. Doctors were more patient-centered with patients they perceived as better communicators, more satisfied, and more likely to adhere. Physicians displayed more patient-centered communication and more favorably perceived patients who expressed positive affect, were more involved, and who were less contentious. Physicians were more contentious with black patients, whom they also perceived as less effective communicators and less satisfied. Finally, physicians who reported a patient-centered orientation to the doctor-patient relationship also were more patient-centered in their communication. The results suggest that reciprocity and mutual influence have a strong effect on these interactions in that more positive (or negative) communication from one participant leads to similar responses from the other. Physicians' encounters with black patients revealed communicative difficulties that may lower quality of care for these patients.

Mortality after cardiac bypass surgery: prediction from administrative versus clinical data.

BACKGROUND: Risk-adjusted outcome rates frequently are used to make inferences about hospital quality of care. We calculated risk-adjusted mortality rates in veterans undergoing isolated coronary artery bypass surgery (CABS) from administrative data and from chart-based clinical data and compared the assessment of hospital high and low outlier status for mortality that results from these 2 data sources. STUDY POPULATION: We studied veterans who underwent CABS in 43 VA hospitals between October 1, 1993, and March 30, 1996 (n=15,288). METHODS: To evaluate administrative data, we entered 6 groups of International Classification of Diseases (ICD)-9-CM codes for comorbid diagnoses from the VA Patient Treatment File (PTF) into a logistic regression model predicting postoperative mortality. We also evaluated counts of comorbid ICD-9-CM codes within each group, along with 3 common principal diagnoses, weekend admission or surgery, major procedures associated with CABS, and demographic variables. Data from the VA Continuous Improvement in Cardiac Surgery Program (CICSP) were used to create a separate clinical model predicting postoperative mortality. For each hospital, an observed-to-expected (O/E) ratio of mortality was calculated from (1) the PTF model and (2) the CICSP model. We defined outlier status as an O/E ratio outside of 1.0 (based on the hospital's 90% confidence interval). To improve the statistical and predictive power of the PTF model, selected clinical variables from CICSP were added to it and outlier status reassessed. RESULTS: Significant predictors of postoperative mortality in the PTF model included 1 group of comorbid ICD-9-CM codes, intraortic balloon pump insertion before CABS, angioplasty on the day of or before CABS, weekend surgery, and a principal diagnosis of other forms of ischemic heart disease. The model's c-index was 0.698. As expected, the CICSP model's predictive power was significantly greater than that of the administrative model (c=0.761). The addition of just 2 CICSP variables to the PTF model improved its predictive power (c=0.741). This model identified 5 of 6 high mortality outliers identified by the CICSP model. Additional CICSP variables were statistically significant predictors but did not improve the assessment of high outlier status. CONCLUSIONS: Models using administrative data to predict postoperative mortality can be improved with the addition of a very small number of clinical variables. Limited clinical improvements of administrative data may make it suitable for use in quality improvement efforts.

Mortality after noncardiac surgery: prediction from administrative versus clinical data.

BACKGROUND: Hospital profiles are increasingly constructed using risk-adjusted clinical data abstracted from patient records. OBJECTIVE: We sought to compare hospital profiles based on risk adjusted death within 30 days of surgery from administrative versus clinical data in a national cohort of surgical patients. DESIGN: This was a cohort study that included 78,546 major noncardiac operations performed between October 1, 1991 and December 31, 1993 in 44 Veterans Affairs hospitals. Administrative data were used to develop and validate multivariable logistic regression models of 30-day postoperative death for all surgery and 4 surgical specialties (general, orthopedic, thoracic, and vascular). Previously developed and validated clinical models were obtained and reproduced for matching operations using data from the VA National Surgical Quality Improvement Program. Observed-to-expected 30-day mortality ratios for administrative and clinical data were calculated and compared for each hospital. RESULTS: In multivariable logistic regression models using administrative data, characteristics such as patient age, race, marital status, admission from a nursing home, interhospital transfer, admission on the weekend, weekend surgery, and risk strata consisting of groups of principal and comorbidity diagnoses were predictive of postoperative mortality (P <0.05). Correlations of the clinical and administrative observed-to-expected ratios were 0.75, 0.83, 0.64, 0.78, and 0.86 for all surgery, general, orthopedic, thoracic, and vascular surgery, respectively. When compared with clinical models, administrative models identified outlier hospitals with sensitivity of 73%, specificity of 89%, positive predictive value of 51%, and negative predictive value of 96%. CONCLUSIONS: Our data suggest that risk adjustment of mortality using administrative data may be useful for screening hospitals for potential quality problems.