Key result
Clinical risk adjustment changed hospital rankings for bypass surgery among 1998 patients across 16 hospitals, but not for angioplasty among 2091 patients.
Why the study?
Does adjusting complication rates for detailed clinical information change hospital rankings for coronary revascularization providers compared to unadjusted or comorbidity-adjusted rates?
Population
4,089 Medicare patients, including 1,998 who had coronary artery bypass surgery in 16 hospitals and 2,091…
Comparison
Hospital ranking based on complication rates… vs Hospital ranking based on unadjusted risk or…
Design
Cohort
Authors
Loading...
Clinical risk adjustment may refine CABG hospital rankings; leaves open whether it improves validity of revascularization quality assessments.
Observational (n=4,089)
Yes
Does adjusting complication rates for detailed clinical information change hospital rankings for coronary revascularization providers compared to unadjusted or comorbidity-adjusted rates?
Adjusting for detailed clinical characteristics, rather than just comorbidities, is necessary for accurately evaluating and ranking providers of coronary artery bypass surgery based on complication rates.
Hartz et al. (1992) conducted an observational in Coronary revascularization (n=4,089). Clinical risk adjustment vs. Unadjusted risk and comorbidity-adjusted risk was evaluated on Hospital rankings based on complication rates. Clinical risk adjustment changed hospital rankings for bypass surgery among 1998 patients across 16 hospitals, but not for angioplasty among 2091 patients.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: