The relationship between adjusted hospital mortality and the results of peer review
- PMID: 8428812
- PMCID: PMC1069912
The relationship between adjusted hospital mortality and the results of peer review
Abstract
This study assessed the relationship between the Health Care Financing Administration adjusted mortality rate for a hospital and the errors in care found by the peer review process. The three data sets used were: (1) the 1987-1988 completed reviews from 38 peer review organizations (PROs) of 4,132 hospitals and 2,035,128 patients; (2) all 1987 hospital mortality rates for Medicare patients as adjusted by HCFA for patient mix; and (3) the 1986 American Hospital Association Survey. The PRO data were used to compute the percentage of cases reviewed from each hospital confirmed by a reviewing physician to have a quality problem. The average percentage of confirmed problems was 3.73 percent with state rates ranging from 0.03 percent to 38.5 percent. The average within-state correlation between the problem rate and the adjusted mortality rate for all PROs was .19 (p < .0001), but the correlations were much higher for relatively homogeneous groups of hospitals, .42 for public hospitals and .36 for hospitals in large metropolitan statistical areas (MSAs). These results suggest that the HCFA adjusted hospital mortality rate and the PRO-confirmed problem rate are related methods to compare hospitals on the basis of quality of care. Both methods may compare quality better if used within a group of homogenous hospitals.
Similar articles
-
One peer review organization's experience in developing hospital peer groups.Clin Perform Qual Health Care. 1993 Oct-Dec;1(4):239-42. Clin Perform Qual Health Care. 1993. PMID: 10135642
-
Using mortality data for profiling hospital quality of care and targeting substandard care.J Soc Health Syst. 1989 May;1(1):31-48. J Soc Health Syst. 1989. PMID: 2491230 Review.
-
Creation of hospital peer groups.Clin Perform Qual Health Care. 1996 Jan-Mar;4(1):51-7. Clin Perform Qual Health Care. 1996. PMID: 10156550
-
Providers question PROs' effectiveness. Critics contend peer review organizations are too costly and fail to improve the quality of care.Health Prog. 1992 Jul-Aug;73(6):28-32, 38. Health Prog. 1992. PMID: 10119535
-
The role of the principal clinical coordinator in the Health Care Financing Administration's Health Care Quality Improvement Initiative.Clin Perform Qual Health Care. 1994 Apr-Jun;2(2):73-9. Clin Perform Qual Health Care. 1994. PMID: 10161149 Review.
Cited by
-
Weak associations between hospital mortality rates for individual diagnoses: implications for profiling hospital quality.Am J Public Health. 1997 Mar;87(3):429-33. doi: 10.2105/ajph.87.3.429. Am J Public Health. 1997. PMID: 9096547 Free PMC article.
-
What is the empirical evidence that hospitals with higher-risk adjusted mortality rates provide poorer quality care? A systematic review of the literature.BMC Health Serv Res. 2007 Jun 20;7:91. doi: 10.1186/1472-6963-7-91. BMC Health Serv Res. 2007. PMID: 17584919 Free PMC article.
-
Judging hospitals by severity-adjusted mortality rates: the influence of the severity-adjustment method.Am J Public Health. 1996 Oct;86(10):1379-87. doi: 10.2105/ajph.86.10.1379. Am J Public Health. 1996. PMID: 8876505 Free PMC article.
-
Are diagnosis specific outcome indicators based on administrative data useful in assessing quality of hospital care?Qual Saf Health Care. 2004 Feb;13(1):32-9. doi: 10.1136/qshc.2002.003996. Qual Saf Health Care. 2004. PMID: 14757797 Free PMC article.
-
HMO penetration, competition, and risk-adjusted hospital mortality.Health Serv Res. 2001 Dec;36(6 Pt 1):1019-35. Health Serv Res. 2001. PMID: 11775665 Free PMC article.
References
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical
Miscellaneous