Key result
A revised administrative claims-based algorithm to identify planned readmissions demonstrated a weighted sensitivity of 49.8%, specificity of 96.5%, PPV of 58.7%, and NPV of 94.5%.
Why the study?
Does an administrative claims-based algorithm accurately identify planned readmissions compared to chart review?
Population
Discharges qualifying for the publicly reported hospital-wide readmission measure at 7 acute-care hospitals…
Comparison
Administrative claims-based algorithm to… vs Gold standard chart review
Design
Other
Authors
Loading...
Limited sensitivity limits routine use for readmission classification; leaves open refinement of claims-based algorithms.
Observational (n=634)
Yes
Does an administrative claims-based algorithm accurately identify planned readmissions compared to chart review?
An administrative claims-based algorithm is feasible for identifying planned readmissions, facilitating public reporting of primarily unplanned readmissions, though positive predictive value is poor for some cardiac procedures.
Horwitz et al. (2015) conducted an observational in Hospital readmissions (n=634). Administrative claims-based algorithm vs. Gold standard chart review was evaluated on Algorithm performance (sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values). A revised administrative claims-based algorithm to identify planned readmissions demonstrated a weighted sensitivity of 49.8%, specificity of 96.5%, PPV of 58.7%, and NPV of 94.5%.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: