Donate Help Contact The AHA Sign In Home
American Heart Association
Circulation
Search: search_blue_button Advanced Search
Circulation. 2007;116:2960-2968
Published online before print December 10, 2007, doi: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.107.712323
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Data Supplement
Right arrow Data Supplement
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
116/25/2960    most recent
CIRCULATIONAHA.107.712323v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Stukenborg, G. J.
Right arrow Articles by Connors, A. F.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Stukenborg, G. J.
Right arrow Articles by Connors, A. F., Jr
Related Collections
Right arrow Health policy and outcome research

(Circulation. 2007;116:2960-2968.)
© 2007 American Heart Association, Inc.


Health Services and Outcomes Research

Which Hospitals Have Significantly Better or Worse Than Expected Mortality Rates for Acute Myocardial Infarction Patients?

Improved Risk Adjustment With Present-at-Admission Diagnoses

George J. Stukenborg, PhD; Douglas P. Wagner, PhD; Frank E. Harrell, Jr, PhD; M. Norman Oliver, MD; Steven W. Heim, MD; Amy L. Price, MD; Caroline Kim Han, MD; Andrew M. D. Wolf, MD; Alfred F. Connors, Jr, MD

From the University of Virginia School of Medicine, Charlottesville (G.J.S., D.P.W., M.N.O., S.W.H., C.K.H., A.M.D.W.); Vanderbilt University School of Medicine, Nashville, Tenn (F.E.H.); Eastern Virginia Medical School, Norfolk (A.L.P.); and Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio (A.F.C.).

Correspondence to George J. Stukenborg, PhD, Department of Public Health Sciences, University of Virginia School of Medicine, Multistory Building (Hospital West Complex), Room 3181, PO Box 800438, Charlottesville, VA 22908-0821. E-mail gstukenborg{at}virginia.edu

Received April 30, 2007; accepted September 21, 2007.

Background— Public reports that compare hospital mortality rates for patients with acute myocardial infarction are commonly used strategies for improving the quality of care delivered to these patients. Fair comparisons of hospital mortality rates require thorough adjustments for differences among patients in baseline mortality risk. This study examines the effect on hospital mortality rate comparisons of improved risk adjustment methods using diagnoses reported as present-at-admission.

Methods and Results— Logistic regression models and related methods originally used by California to compare hospital mortality rates for patients with acute myocardial infarction are replicated. These results are contrasted with results obtained for the same hospitals by patient-level mortality risk adjustment models using present-at-admission diagnoses, using 3 statistical methods of identifying hospitals with higher or lower than expected mortality: indirect standardization, adjusted odds ratios, and hierarchical models. Models using present-at-admission diagnoses identified substantially fewer hospitals as outliers than did California model A for each of the 3 statistical methods considered.

Conclusions— Large improvements in statistical performance can be achieved with the use of present-at-admission diagnoses to characterize baseline mortality risk. These improvements are important because models with better statistical performance identify different hospitals as having better or worse than expected mortality.


 

CLINICAL PERSPECTIVE




This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
J Am Coll CardiolHome page
M. A. Hlatky and P. A. Heidenreich
The Year in Epidemiology, Health Services Research, and Outcomes Research
J. Am. Coll. Cardiol., April 21, 2009; 53(16): 1459 - 1466.
[Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
CirculationHome page
C. P. Gale, J. S. Birkhead, and S. O.M. Manda
Letter by Gale et al Regarding Article, "Which Hospitals Have Significantly Better or Worse Than Expected Mortality Rates for Acute Myocardial Infarction Patients? Improved Risk Adjustment With Present-at-Admission Diagnoses"
Circulation, July 1, 2008; 118(1): e9 - e9.
[Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
CirculationHome page
G. J. Stukenborg, D. P. Wagner, M. N. Oliver, S. W. Heim, C. K. Han, A. M.D. Wolf, F. E. Harrell Jr, A. L. Price, and A. F. Connors Jr
Response to Letter Regarding Article, "Which Hospitals Have Significantly Better or Worse Than Expected Mortality Rates for Acute Myocardial Infarction Patients? Improved Risk Adjustment With Present-at-Admission Diagnoses"
Circulation, July 1, 2008; 118(1): e10 - e10.
[Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
CirculationHome page
J. V. Tu and P. C. Austin
Cardiac Report Cards: How Can They Be Made Better?
Circulation, December 18, 2007; 116(25): 2897 - 2899.
[Full Text] [PDF]