RESUMEN
INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES: There are limited recent data on the burden of chronic hepatitis B (CHB) in the North American general population. We aimed to identify the CHB burden from a Canadian population-based perspective. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Using a retrospective cohort design, we searched Alberta Analytics administrative databases including the Provincial Laboratory database, to describe CHB epidemiology and natural history in Alberta, Canada between fiscal years 2012-2020. We analyzed incidence and prevalence trends using a Poisson regression model and conducted Kaplan-Meier analyses to examine the incident cohort's survival. RESULTS: The age/sex-adjusted incidence of CHB between 2015-2020 was 27.1/100,000 person/years (29.6/100,000 in males and 24.5/100,000 in females) and was highest among individuals aged 45-64 years. Despite a decrease in annual incidence of CHB from 36.4 to 13.4/100,000 between 2015-2020, prevalence increased from 98.9 to 210.3/100,000 in the same period. Of 6,860 incident cases, 2.1% died, and 0.2% underwent liver transplantation during a median follow-up of 3.6 years (interquartile range 2.0-4.9 years). CHB patients had significantly lower survival rates compared to age/sex-matched Canadians, with a standardized mortality ratio of 3.9 (95% confidence interval [CI] 3.3-4.6). Male sex (hazard ratio [HR] 1.7; 95% CI 1.2-2.5), older age at diagnosis (HR, 1.08; 95% CI 1.07-1.09) independently predicted mortality. CONCLUSIONS: CHB incidence decreased in Alberta, which is consistent with nationwide trends. Males and individuals aged 45-64 had higher CHB incidence and prevalence. CHB patients' lower survival rates emphasize the need to address barriers to guideline recommended HBV care linkage.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Hospital outcome report cards are used to judge provider performance, including for liver transplantation. We aimed to determine the impact of the choice of risk adjustment method on hospital rankings based on mortality rates in cirrhotic patients. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We identified 68,426 cirrhotic patients hospitalized in the Nationwide Inpatient Sample database. Four risk adjustment methods (the Charlson/Deyo and Elixhauser algorithms, Disease Staging, and All Patient Refined Diagnosis Related Groups) were used in logistic regression models for mortality. Observed to expected (O/E) death rates were calculated for each method and hospital. Statistical outliers with higher or lower than expected mortality were identified and rankings compared across methods. RESULTS: Unadjusted mortality rates for the 553 hospitals ranged from 1.4 to 30% (overall, 10.6%). For 163 hospitals (29.5%), observed mortality differed significantly from expected when judged by one or more, but not all four, risk adjustment methods (25.9% higher than expected mortality and 3.6% lower than expected mortality). Only 28% of poor performers and 10% of superior performers were consistently ranked as such by all methods. Agreement between methods as to whether hospitals were flagged as outliers was moderate (kappa 0.51-0.59), except the Charlson/Deyo and Elixhauser algorithms which demonstrated excellent agreement (kappa 0.75). CONCLUSIONS: Hospital performance reports for patients with cirrhosis require sensitivity to the method of risk adjustment. Depending upon the method, up to 30% of hospitals may be flagged as outliers by one, but not all methods. These discrepancies could have important implications for centers erroneously labeled as high mortality outliers.