Between-hospital variation in indicators of quality of care: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Efforts to mitigate unwarranted variation in the quality of care require insight into the 'level' (eg, patient, physician, ward, hospital) at which observed variation exists. This systematic literature review aims to synthesise the results of studies that quantify the extent to which hospitals contribute to variation in quality indicator scores. METHODS: Embase, Medline, Web of Science, Cochrane and Google Scholar were systematically searched from 2010 to November 2023. We included studies that reported a measure of between-hospital variation in quality indicator scores relative to total variation, typically expressed as a variance partition coefficient (VPC). The results were analysed by disease category and quality indicator type. RESULTS: In total, 8373 studies were reviewed, of which 44 met the inclusion criteria. Casemix adjusted variation was studied for multiple disease categories using 144 indicators, divided over 5 types: intermediate clinical outcomes (n=81), final clinical outcomes (n=35), processes (n=10), patient-reported experiences (n=15) and patient-reported outcomes (n=3). In addition to an analysis of between-hospital variation, eight studies also reported physician-level variation (n=54 estimates). In general, variation that could be attributed to hospitals was limited (median VPC=3%, IQR=1%-9%). Between-hospital variation was highest for process indicators (17.4%, 10.8%-33.5%) and lowest for final clinical outcomes (1.4%, 0.6%-4.2%) and patient-reported outcomes (1.0%, 0.9%-1.5%). No clear pattern could be identified in the degree of between-hospital variation by disease category. Furthermore, the studies exhibited limited attention to the reliability of observed differences in indicator scores. CONCLUSION: Hospital-level variation in quality indicator scores is generally small relative to residual variation. However, meaningful variation between hospitals does exist for multiple indicators, especially for care processes which can be directly influenced by hospital policy. Quality improvement strategies are likely to generate more impact if preceded by level-specific and indicator-specific analyses of variation, and when absolute variation is also considered. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42022315850.

Factors Influencing the Introduction of Value-Based Payment in Integrated Stroke Care: Evidence from a Qualitative Case Study.

Background: To address issues related to suboptimal insight in outcomes, fragmentation, and increasing costs, stakeholders are experimenting with value-based payment (VBP) models, aiming to facilitate high-value integrated care. However, insight in how, why and under what circumstances such models can be successful is limited. Drawing upon realist evaluation principles, this study identifies context factors and associated mechanisms influencing the introduction of VBP in stroke care. Methods: Existing knowledge on context-mechanism relations impacting the introduction of VBP programs (in real-world settings) was summarized from literature. These relations were then tested, refined, and expanded based on a case study comprising interviews with representatives from organizations involved in the introduction of a VBP model for integrated stroke care in Rotterdam, the Netherlands. Results: Facilitating factors were pre-existing trust-based relations, shared dissatisfaction with the status quo, regulatory compatibility and simplicity of the payment contract, gradual introduction of down-side risk for providers, and involvement of a trusted third party for data management. Yet to be addressed barriers included friction between short- and long-term goals within and among organizations, unwillingness to forgo professional and organizational autonomy, discontinuity in resources, and limited access to real-time data for improving care delivery processes. Conclusions: Successful payment and delivery system reform require long-term commitment from all stakeholders stretching beyond the mere introduction of new models. Careful consideration of creating the 'right' contextual circumstances remains crucially important, which includes willingness among all involved providers to bear shared financial and clinical responsibility for the entire care chain, regardless of where care is provided.

Between-Hospital and Between-Physician Variation in Outcomes and Costs in High- and Low-Complex Surgery: A Nationwide Multilevel Analysis.

OBJECTIVES: Clinicians and policy makers are increasingly exploring strategies to reduce unwarranted variation in outcomes and costs. Adequately accounting for case mix and better insight into the levels at which variation exists is crucial for such strategies. This nationwide study investigates variation in surgical outcomes and costs at the level of hospitals and individual physicians and evaluates whether these can be reliably compared on performance. METHODS: Variation was analyzed using 92 330 patient records collected from 62 Dutch hospitals who underwent surgery for colorectal cancer (n = 6640), urinary bladder cancer (n = 14 030), myocardial infarction (n = 31 870), or knee osteoarthritis (n = 39 790) in the period 2018 to 2019. Multilevel regression modeling with and without case-mix adjustment was used to partition variation in between-hospital and between-physician components for in-hospital mortality, intensive care unit admission, length of stay, 30-day readmission, 30-day reintervention, and in-hospital costs. Reliability was calculated for each treatment-outcome combination at both levels. RESULTS: Across outcomes, hospital-level variation relative to total variation ranged between ≤ 1% and 15%, and given the high caseloads, this typically yielded high reliability (> 0.9). In contrast, physician-level variation components were typically ≤ 1%, with limited opportunities to make reliable comparisons. The impact of case-mix adjustment was limited, but nonnegligible. CONCLUSIONS: It is not typically possible to make reliable comparisons among physicians due to limited partitioned variation and low caseloads. Nevertheless, for hospitals, the opposite often holds. Although variation-reduction efforts directed at hospitals are thus more likely to be successful, this should be approached cautiously, partly because level-specific variation and the impact of case mix vary considerably across treatments and outcomes.

Stroboscopic light effects during electronic dance music festivals and photosensitive epilepsy: a cohort study and case report.

OBJECTIVES: Electronic dance music (EDM) concerts are becoming increasingly popular. Strong stroboscopic light effects are commonly part of these shows, and may provoke seizures in individuals with photosensitive epilepsy. This study aims to examine the risk of epileptic seizures during EDM concerts. SETTING: 28 EDM concerts taking place in The Netherlands. PARTICIPANTS: We describe a young man who experienced a seizure during an EDM concert, and who later showed a positive electroencephalographic provocation test during exposure to video footage of the same concert. Subsequently, we performed a cohort study of 400 343 visitors to EDM concerts, divided in those exposed (concert occurring in darkness) versus unexposed (concert in daylight) to stroboscopic light effects. RESULTS: In total, 400 343 EDM concert visitors were included: 241 543 (representing 2 222 196 person hours) in the exposed group and 158 800 (representing 2 334 360 person hours) in the control group. The incidence density ratio of epileptic seizures in exposed versus unexposed individuals was 3.5 (95% CI: 1.7 to 7.8; p<0.0005). Less than one-third of cases occurred during use of ecstasy or similar stimulant drugs. CONCLUSION: Stroboscopic light effects during EDM concerts occurring in darkness probably more than triple the risk of epileptic seizures. Concert organisers and audience should warn against the risk of seizures and promote precautionary measures in susceptible individuals.

Is Textbook Outcome a valuable composite measure for short-term outcomes of gastrointestinal treatments in the Netherlands using hospital information system data? A retrospective cohort study.

OBJECTIVE: To develop a feasible model for monitoring short-term outcome of clinical care trajectories for hospitals in the Netherlands using data obtained from hospital information systems for identifying hospital variation. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective analysis of collected data from hospital information systems combined with clinical indicator definitions to define and compare short-term outcomes for three gastrointestinal pathways using the concept of Textbook Outcome. SETTING: 62 Dutch hospitals. PARTICIPANTS: 45 848 unique gastrointestinal patients discharged in 2015. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: A broad range of clinical outcomes including length of stay, reintervention, readmission and doctor-patient counselling. RESULTS: Patients undergoing endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) for gallstone disease (n=4369), colonoscopy for inflammatory bowel disease (IBD; n=19 330) and colonoscopy for colorectal cancer screening (n=22 149) were submitted to five suitable clinical indicators per treatment. The percentage of all patients who met all five criteria was 54%±9% (SD) for ERCP treatment. For IBD this was 47%±7% of the patients, and for colon cancer screening this number was 85%±14%. CONCLUSION: This study shows that reusing data obtained from hospital information systems combined with clinical indicator definitions can be used to express short-term outcomes using the concept of Textbook Outcome without any excess registration. This information can provide meaningful insight into the clinical care trajectory on the level of individual patient care. Furthermore, this concept can be applied to many clinical trajectories within gastroenterology and beyond for monitoring and improving the clinical pathway and outcome for patients.