Accepting critically ill transfer patients: Adverse effect on a referral center's outcome and benchmark measures

被引:174
作者
Rosenberg, AL
Hofer, TP
Strachan, C
Watts, CM
Hayward, RA
机构
[1] Univ Michigan, Ctr Med, Dept Anesthesiol & Crit Care, Ann Arbor, MI 48109 USA
[2] Vet Affairs Ann Arbor Healthcare Syst, Dept Vet Affairs Hlth Serv Res & Dev Serv, Ann Arbor, MI USA
关键词
INTENSIVE-CARE-UNIT; QUALITY-OF-CARE; ACADEMIC-MEDICAL-CENTER; LEAD-TIME BIAS; MANAGED CARE; HOSPITAL MORTALITY; INTERHOSPITAL TRANSFERS; ACUTE PHYSIOLOGY; RISK ADJUSTMENT; SCORING SYSTEM;
D O I
10.7326/0003-4819-138-11-200306030-00009
中图分类号
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
Background: Common methods of benchmarking clinical performance rarely, if ever, account for admission source and, in particular, the effect of a patient being transferred from one medical center to another. Small biases in comparisons of observed versus expected deaths can substantially affect how high-quality institutions compare with peer hospitals. With the most sophisticated and validated set of case-mix measures available for patients, the intensive care unit is an ideal setting in which to study the effect of a patient's being transferred from another hospital. Objective: To determine the extent of bias in benchmarking outcomes when performance measures do not account for transfer patients' greater severity of illness. Design: Prospectively developed cohort study. Setting: Medical intensive care unit (MICU) at a tertiary care university hospital. Patients: 4579 consecutive admissions for 4208 patients from 1 January 1994 to 1 April 1998. Measurements: MICU and hospital lengths of stay, MICU readmission, and hospital mortality rates. Results: Compared with directly admitted patients, MICU patients transferred from another hospital had significantly higher Acute Physiology Scores at the time of admission and discharge (P = 0.001). Even after full adjustment for case mix and severity of illness, transfer patients had a 38% longer MICU stay (95% CI, 32% to 45%), a 41% longer hospital stay (CI, 34% to 50%), and a 2.2 times greater odds of hospital mortality (CI, 1.7 to 2.8) than directly admitted patients. With identical efficiency and quality, a referral hospital with a 25% MICU transfer rate compared with another with a 0% transfer rate would be penalized by 14 excess deaths per 1000 admissions when a benchmarking program adjusts only for case mix and severity of illness and not for the source of admission. Conclusions: In a setting with the most thorough diagnostic-based, case-mix adjustment and the most physiologically precise severity-of-illness information, accepting transfer patients can adversely affect efficiency and quality benchmarks. Benchmarking and profiling efforts beyond intensive care units must also recognize and account for this phenomenon; otherwise, referral centers may have an incentive to refuse care for patients who could benefit from being transferred to their facility.
引用
收藏
页码:882 / 890
页数:9
相关论文
共 62 条
[41]   PATTERNS OF RESOURCE CONSUMPTION IN MEDICAL INTENSIVE-CARE [J].
OYE, RK ;
BELLAMY, PE .
CHEST, 1991, 99 (03) :685-689
[42]  
*PHC4, 1995, FOC HEART ATT W PENN
[43]   TIMING OF INTENSIVE-CARE UNIT ADMISSION IN RELATION TO ICU OUTCOME [J].
RAPOPORT, J ;
TERES, D ;
LEMESHOW, S ;
HARRIS, D .
CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE, 1990, 18 (11) :1231-1235
[44]   RESOURCE UTILIZATION AMONG INTENSIVE-CARE PATIENTS - MANAGED CARE VS TRADITIONAL INSURANCE [J].
RAPOPORT, J ;
GEHLBACH, S ;
LEMESHOW, S ;
TERES, D .
ARCHIVES OF INTERNAL MEDICINE, 1992, 152 (11) :2207-2212
[45]   A COMPARISON OF ADMINISTRATIVE VERSUS CLINICAL-DATA - CORONARY-ARTERY BYPASS-SURGERY AS AN EXAMPLE [J].
ROMANO, PS ;
ROOS, LL ;
LUFT, HS ;
JOLLIS, JG ;
DOLISZNY, K .
JOURNAL OF CLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGY, 1994, 47 (03) :249-260
[46]   Who bounces back? Physiologic and other predictors of intensive care unit readmission [J].
Rosenberg, AL ;
Hofer, TP ;
Hayward, RA ;
Strachan, C ;
Watts, CM .
CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE, 2001, 29 (03) :511-518
[47]  
Rosenthal G E, 1997, Am J Med Qual, V12, P103, DOI 10.1177/0885713X9701200204
[48]   CLEVELAND HEALTH QUALITY CHOICE - A MODEL FOR COLLABORATIVE COMMUNITY-BASED OUTCOMES ASSESSMENT [J].
ROSENTHAL, GE ;
HARPER, DL .
JOINT COMMISSION JOURNAL ON QUALITY IMPROVEMENT, 1994, 20 (08) :425-442
[49]   Outcomes research in critical care - Results of the American Thoracic Society Critical Care Assembly Workshop on Outcomes Research [J].
Rubenfeld, GD ;
Angus, DC ;
Pinsky, MR ;
Curtis, JR ;
Connors, AF ;
Bernard, GR .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF RESPIRATORY AND CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE, 1999, 160 (01) :358-367
[50]   PATIENTS RATINGS OF OUTPATIENT VISITS IN DIFFERENT PRACTICE SETTINGS - RESULTS FROM THE MEDICAL OUTCOMES STUDY [J].
RUBIN, HR ;
GANDEK, B ;
ROGERS, WH ;
KOSINSKI, M ;
MCHORNEY, CA ;
WARE, JE .
JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, 1993, 270 (07) :835-840