Hospital performance comparison of inpatient fall rates; the impact of risk adjusting for patient-related factors: a multicentre cross-sectional survey.

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Comparing inpatient fall rates can serve as a benchmark for quality improvement. To improve the comparability of performance between hospitals, adjustments for patient-related fall risk factors that are not modifiable by care are recommended. Thereafter, the remaining variability in risk-adjusted fall rates can be attributed to differences in quality of care provided by a hospital. Research on risk-adjusted fall rates and their impact on hospital comparisons is currently sparse. Therefore, the aims of this study were to develop an inpatient fall risk adjustment model based on patient-related fall risk factors, and to analyse the impact of applying this model on comparisons of inpatient fall rates in acute care hospitals in Switzerland. METHODS: Data on inpatient falls in Swiss acute care hospitals were collected on one day in 2017, 2018 and 2019, as part of an annual multicentre cross-sectional survey. After excluding maternity and outpatient wards, all inpatients older than 18 years were included. Two-level logistic regression models were used to construct unadjusted and risk-adjusted caterpillar plots to compare inter-hospital variability in inpatient fall rates. RESULTS: One hundred thirty eight hospitals and 35,998 patients were included in the analysis. Risk adjustment showed that the following factors were associated with a higher risk of falling increasing care dependency (to a great extent care dependent, odds ratio 3.43, 95% confidence interval 2.78-4.23), a fall in the last 12 months (OR 2.14, CI 1.89-2.42), the intake of sedative and or psychotropic medications (OR 1.74, CI 1.54-1.98), mental and behavioural disorders (OR 1.55, CI 1.36-1.77) and higher age (OR 1.01, CI 1.01-1.02). With odds ratios between 1.26 and 0.67, eight further ICD-10 diagnosis groups were included. Female sex (OR 0.78, CI 0.70-0.88) and postoperative patients (OR 0.83, CI 0.73-0.95) were associated with a lower risk of falling. Unadjusted caterpillar plots identified 20 low- and 3 high-performing hospitals. After risk adjustment, 2 low-performing hospitals remained. CONCLUSIONS: Risk adjustment of inpatient fall rates could reduce misclassification of hospital performance and enables a fairer basis for decision-making and quality improvement measures. Patient-related fall risk factors such as care dependency, history of falls and cognitive impairment should be routinely assessed.