Key result
Double counting transferred patients inflates acute MI incidence rates by ~15%.
Why the study?
Double counting and transfer bias in hospital discharge data may lead to inaccurate estimation of incidence rates and outcomes of acute myocardial infarction in the United States.
Comparison
Transferred patients vs nontransferred patients
Design
Observational analysis of state hospital discharge data with matching algorithm validation
Follow-up
3 years (1995 to 1997)
Authors
Loading...
Uncorrected discharge databases may overestimate acute MI incidence; challenges validity of prior administrative surveillance and research estimates.
Observational
Yes
Double counting of transferred patients in hospital discharge databases leads to significant overestimation of acute MI incidence and underestimation of in-hospital mortality, particularly in rural regions.
Westfall et al. (2001) conducted an observational in Ischemic heart disease (acute myocardial infarction). Hospital transfer and double counting was evaluated on Number of patients counted twice for one episode of acute MI. Double counting of transferred patients resulted in an estimated 10% to 15% overestimation of acute MI incidence rates, reaching 35% to 50% in some rural counties.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: