Key result
Using symmetric control limits on funnel plots for highly skewed PROM data inflated the probability of false alarms for poor provider performance from 0.1% to 0.2-0.3% compared to simulated limits.
Observational (n=25,109)
Yes
When comparing provider performance using highly skewed patient-reported outcome measures, simulated control limits on funnel plots reduce the risk of false alarms compared to symmetric limits.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Symmetric limits risk more false alarms in PROM-based provider profiling; leaves open validation of simulated limits before routine use.
BACKGROUND: Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) often produce skewed distributions of individual scores after a healthcare intervention. For health performance indicators derived from skewed distributions, funnel plots designed with symmetric control limits may increase the risk of false alarms about poor performance. AIM: To investigate the accuracy of funnel plots with symmetric control limits when comparing provider performance based on PROMs. METHODS: The authors used a database containing condition-specific PROMs for 17,453 hip replacements and 7656 varicose vein procedures performed by providers in the English NHS. The mean postoperative PROM score, adjusted for patient characteristics, was used as the measure of performance. To compare performance, symmetric 99.8% control limits were calculated on funnel plots, 3 SDs away from the overall mean on either side. These were compared to control limits derived directly from percentiles of simulated (bootstrap) distributions of mean scores. RESULTS: The simulated control limits on funnel plots for both procedures were asymmetric. The empirical probability of falling outside the symmetric 99.8% 'poor performance' control limit was inflated from the stipulated rate of 0.1% to 0.2-0.3% for provider sample sizes of up to 150 procedures. The authors observed that, out of 237 providers of hip replacement, eight had adjusted mean scores that exceeded the symmetric 'poor performance' limit compared with only five that exceeded the corresponding simulated limit. In other words, three (1.3%) were differently classified. For varicose vein surgery, five out of 160 providers exceeded the symmetric limit and four exceeded the simulated limit, that is, 1 (0.6%) was differently classified. CONCLUSIONS: When designing funnel plots for comparisons of provider performance based on highly skewed data, the use of simulated control limits should be considered.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Neuburger et al. (2011) conducted an observational in Hip replacement and varicose veins (n=25,109). Symmetric control limits on funnel plots vs. Simulated (bootstrap) control limits was evaluated on Probability of falling outside the 'poor performance' control limit. Using symmetric control limits on funnel plots for highly skewed PROM data inflated the probability of false alarms for poor provider performance from 0.1% to 0.2-0.3% compared to simulated limits.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: