Identifying High and Low Performing Emergency General Surgery Hospitals Using Direct Standardization
Goldberg, D. W.; Kelz, R. R.; Keele, L.; Wirtalla, C.; Syvyk, S.
Show abstract
ImportanceVariation in outcomes for emergency general surgery conditions has been shown at the hospital level. Few have examined difference across hospitals for older adults who often present with the greatest risk. To date, no one has examined differences in the outcome for those undergoing operative and nonoperative treatment. ObjectiveIdentify high and low performing emergency general surgery (EGS) hospitals with risk-standardization to determine clinical performance differences as well as correlation between patients treated operatively and non-operatively. DesignA retrospective cohort study with 30-day outcomes. SettingNationwide study of acute care hospitals. ParticipantsMedicare beneficiaries > 65.5 years old hospitalized for an emergency general surgery condition admitted from July 1, 2015 to June 30, 2018. ExposureUnique hospital identification. Main outcomeA composite metric of 30-day mortality, adverse events, prolonged length of stay, and readmission. ResultsThere were 536,284 total patients with a mean age of 74.4 {+/-} 12.2 years, 55% female, 84% white with average claims-based frailty index of 0.16 {+/-} 0.06 and mean comorbidity count of 3.57 {+/-} 2.46. Amongst the 1866 hospitals identified, there were 3 best performing and 11 worst performing hospitals. There were weak correlations between operative and non-operative for mortality (0.10), adverse events rates (0.21), prolonged length of stay (0.32), and readmissions (0.18) at the hospital level (all p<0.001). Conclusions and RelevanceSignificant variation exists in EGS hospital performance with best ranked hospitals out-performing worst ranked hospitals on adverse event, mortality, prolonged length of stay and readmission. There is little association between patient outcomes for those treated with operative and non-operative care.
Matching journals
The top 3 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- Unplanned Hospital Visits after Ambulatory Surgical Care 95%
- Hospital segregation, critical care strain, and inpatient mortality during the COVID-19 pandemic in New York City 95%
- Evaluating the predictive value of frailty scores for critical care admission and hospital stay in elderly surgical patients: a comparison of the mFI-5 and CCI 94%
Similar papers in this journal
- Predictors of adverse outcome in patients with suspected COVID-19 managed in a ‘virtual hospital’ setting: a cohort study 93%
- Clinical, Behavioral and Social Factors Associated with Racial Disparities in Hospitalized and Ambulatory COVID-19 Patients from an Integrated Health Care System in Georgia 92%
- The impact of patient-centered care on quality of life and hope among patients receiving home medical care: The Zaitaku Evaluative Initiatives and Outcome Study 92%
Similar papers in this journal
- A Novel Method for Handling Pre-Existing Conditions in Prediction Models for Covid-19 Death 90%
- Point-of-care electroencephalography for prediction of postoperative delirium in older adults undergoing elective surgery: protocol for a prospective cohort study 89%
- A Systematic Review of the Application of Computational Grounded Theory Method in Healthcare Research 88%
Similar papers in this journal
- The impact of atypical intrahospital transfers on patient outcomes: a mixed methods study 93%
- Rapid Clinical Screening and Staging for COVID-19 Severe Outcome A Hospitalization Study in New York City 92%
- Risk factors for severe COVID-19 differ by age: a retrospective study of hospitalized adults 92%
Similar papers in this journal
- Consistency of performance of adverse outcome prediction models for hospitalized COVID-19 patients 93%
- Score for Emergency Risk Prediction (SERP): An Interpretable Machine Learning AutoScore–Derived Triage Tool for Predicting Mortality after Emergency Admissions 93%
- Out-of-Pocket Spending for COVID-19 Hospitalizations in 2020 92%
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.