Back

Hospital Standardised Length of Stay Ratio

Duke, G. J.

2025-06-28 health systems and quality improvement
10.1101/2025.06.26.25330250 medRxiv
Show abstract

ObjectiveHospital length of stay (LOS) is a key indicator of hospital efficiency and quality of care, but a reliable metric for benchmarking LOS remains problematic. This report describes the methodology to generate a standardised hospital LOS ratio (HSLR). DesignRetrospective observational analysis of LOS from an administrative dataset using a survival (time-to-event) analytic approach to generate average (aLOS) and risk-adjusted LOS (pLOS), and the HSLR (= [sum observed LOS]/[sum total pLOS]). Setting334 (public and private) hospitals in the state of Victoria, Australia, adult population 5.28 million. Participants2.73 million adult multi-day acute-care hospital separations and 15.53 million bed-days over five years, July 2019 - June 2024. Main outcomesHospital aLOS, pLOS, and HSLR at the provider level with model fit assessed for calibration (Cox-Snell residuals), classification (aLOS and HSLR results for each hospital-years compared to benchmark), variance (intra-class correlation coefficient [ICC]) and dispersion (value [{phi}] and random effect standard deviation [{tau}]) characteristics. ResultsLOS was markedly right skewed and autocorrelated (p<0.001); population median 3.94 (interquartile range: 2.48-6.76); aLOS 5.68 {+/-}4.98 days. LOS prediction model included six demographic covariates (age, sex, aged-care residency, emergent, admission source, unplanned transfer) and 12,145 separate principal diagnoses aggregated into nine ranked LOS risk-categories. 572 (61% of 940 hospital-year) aLOS values were outside {+/-}3SD benchmark; whereas 936 (99.5%) HSLR values within {+/-}3SD; 98% within {+/-}2SD. Model dispersion ({phi} = 2.80; {tau} = 0.15) and ICC at provider level (0.025) were low. ConclusionsaLOS is a simple descriptor but poor comparator. Time-to-event survival analytic models furnish risk-adjusted pLOS and HSLR metrics which indicate that majority of LOS variation is due to patient-related, not hospital, factors.

Matching journals

The top 4 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"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.