Key result
Congenital heart surgery operative mortality varies ~3-fold across hospitals, persisting even in lower-risk cases.
Why the study?
Optimal strategies to improve national congenital heart surgery outcomes and reduce variability across hospitals remained unclear, with prior efforts focused primarily on higher-risk patients and mortality alone.
Cohort (n=84,407)
Yes
Captured external expert commentary on this paper, strongest first. Original sources are linked where available.
“If a family is taking their child to a center, they should know if it's an essential or comprehensive center. Essential centers shouldn't be taking on complex patients who need a higher level of care.”
“There's a significant variation in outcomes in the US. Our thoughts were that if there are a number of centers that have excellent results, why can't we translate what they are doing that makes them so successful and incorporate that into other programs so that we have more uniform outcomes.”
“In the last several years there have been multiple news stories regarding poor outcomes at different congenital heart centers. These reports have led to understandable concern and confusion on the part of patients and their families about whether their own institution is providing safe, quality care. Under the leadership of the Congenital Heart Surgeons' Society — the leading professional society for congenital heart surgery — our specialty, for the first time, has put forward recommendations for all congenital heart surgery centers.”
Significant hospital-level variation exists in morbidity and mortality after congenital heart surgery across all risk strata, with a substantial portion of potential national improvements related to lower-risk cases.
BACKGROUND: Optimal strategies to improve national congenital heart surgery outcomes and reduce variability across hospitals remain unclear. Many policy and quality improvement efforts have focused primarily on higher-risk patients and mortality alone. Improving our understanding of both morbidity and mortality and current variation across the spectrum of complexity would better inform future efforts. METHODS: Hospitals participating in the Society of Thoracic Surgeons Congenital Heart Surgery Database (2014-2017) were included. Case mix-adjusted operative mortality, major complications, and postoperative length of stay were evaluated using Bayesian models. Hospital variation was quantified by the interdecile ratio (IDR, upper versus lower 10%) and 95% credible intervals (CrIs). Stratified analyses were performed by risk group (Society of Thoracic Surgeons-European Association for Cardiothoracic Surgery [STAT] category) and simulations evaluated the potential impact of reductions in variation. RESULTS: A total of 102 hospitals (n=84 407) were included, representing ≈85% of US congenital heart programs. STAT category 1 to 3 (lower risk) operations comprised 74% of cases. All outcomes varied significantly across hospitals: adjusted mortality by 3-fold (upper versus lower decile 5.0% versus 1.6%, IDR 3.1 [95% CrI 2.5-3.7]), mean length of stay by 1.8-fold (19.2 versus 10.5 days, IDR 1.8 [95% CrI 1.8-1.9]), and major complications by >3-fold (23.5% versus 7.0%, IDR 3.4 [95% CrI 3.0-3.8]). The degree of variation was similar or greater for low- versus high-risk cases across outcomes, eg, ≈3-fold mortality variation across hospitals for STAT 1 to 3 (IDR 3.0 [95% CrI 2.1-4.2]) and STAT 4 or 5 (IDR 3.1 [95% CrI 2.4-3.9]) cases. High-volume hospitals had less variability across outcomes and risk categories. Simulations suggested potential reductions in deaths (n=282), major complications (n=1539), and length of stay (101 183 days) over the 4-year study period if all hospitals were to perform at the current median or better, with 37% to 60% of the improvement related to the STAT 1 to 3 (lower risk) group across outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: We demonstrate significant hospital variation in morbidity and mortality after congenital heart surgery. Contrary to traditional thinking, a substantial portion of potential improvements that could be realized on a national scale were related to variability among lower-risk cases. These findings suggest modifications to our current approaches to optimize care and outcomes in this population are needed.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Pasquali et al. (2020) conducted a cohort in Congenital heart disease requiring surgery (n=84,407). Hospital variation was evaluated on Case mix-adjusted operative mortality (IDR 3.1, 95% CI 2.5-3.7). Adjusted operative mortality varied 3-fold across hospitals (upper vs lower decile 5.0% vs 1.6%, IDR 3.1), with substantial variation present even among lower-risk cases.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: