Search PubMed⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

D L Harper

Publications and source records attributed to D L Harper.

At least 37 records · Page 2Linked to original sources
PubMed1998

Variations in standardized hospital mortality rates for six common medical diagnoses: implications for profiling hospital quality.

OBJECTIVES: The authors determined whether standardized hospital mortality rates varied for six common medical diagnoses. METHODS: The retrospective cohort study included 89,851 patients aged 18 years and older discharged from 30 hospitals in a large metropolitan area in 1991 to 1993 with a principal diagnosis of acute myocardial infarction, congestive heart failure, pneumonia, stroke, obstructive lung disease, or gastrointestinal hemorrhage. For each hospital, standardized mortality ratios (observed/predicted mortality) were determined using validated risk-adjustment models that were based on clinical data elements abstracted from patients' hospital records. Hospitals also were categorized into quintiles on the basis of standardized mortality ratios. Correlations between standardized mortality ratios and agreement between quintile rankings were determined for each pair of diagnoses. RESULTS: Correlations between hospital-standardized mortality ratios for individual diagnoses were generally weak. For the 15 possible pairs of diagnoses, Pearson coefficients ranged from -0.10 to 0.43; only six were 0.30 or greater. Agreement between hospital quintile rankings was also generally low, with weighted kappa values ranging from -0.12 to 0.42. Three of 15 kappa values were less than 0 (ie, agreement lower than chance), and only four exceeded 0.20, the threshold for "fair" agreement. Although simulated analyses found that random variation and relatively low hospital volumes accounted for some of the difference in standardized mortality ratios for diagnoses, a large proportion of the difference remained unexplained. CONCLUSIONS: Standardized hospital mortality rates varied for six diagnoses that likely are managed by similar practitioners. Although variability may be decreased by restricting analyses to hospitals with large volumes, the findings indicate that for many hospitals, diagnosis-specific mortality rates may be an inconsistent measure of hospital quality, even when data are aggregated for multiple years.

Adolescent↗
PubMed1998

Associations between the use of do-not-resuscitate orders and length of stay in patients with stroke.

OBJECTIVES: The study sought to describe the association between do-not-resuscitate (DNR) orders and length of hospital stay (LOS), and how the association varies according to in-hospital mortality, timing of the DNR order, and admission severity of illness. METHODS: The authors conducted a retrospective cohort analysis involving standardized review of patients' medical records. The study was performed at 30 acute care hospitals in a large metropolitan area. The authors studied the data of 13,337 consecutive patients with a primary diagnosis of stroke discharged in 1991 through 1994. RESULTS: Do-not-resuscitate orders were written for 22% (n = 2,898) of the sample. In all patients, mean LOS was longer in patients with DNR orders than in patients without orders (12.0 versus 9.5 days; P < 0.001). A series of Cox regression analyses were performed to adjust LOS for admission severity of illness and other covariates. In analyses of patients discharged alive (n = 12,011), LOS was similar in patients with DNR orders written on days 1 to 2 compared with patients without DNR orders. However, LOS was longer in patients with DNR orders written on days 3 to 7 (Hazard Ratio [HR], 1.59; 95% CI, 1.43-1.77) and on day 8 or later (HR, 2.72; 95% CI, 2.34-3.16). In analyses of patients who died (n = 1,326), LOS was shorter for patients with DNR orders written on days 1 and 2 (HR, 0.59; 95% CI, 0.49-0.71) than for patients without DNR orders but was longer among patients with DNR orders written on day 8 or later (HR, 2.58; 95% CI, 2.06-3.22). In analyses stratified by admission severity, the relative effect of a DNR order tended to be less in patients with higher severity. CONCLUSIONS: The relationship between DNR orders and LOS is complex and varies according to in-hospital mortality, the timing of the DNR order, and admission severity of illness. These findings highlight the importance of explicitly accounting for such factors in studies evaluating the implications of DNR orders on the costs of hospital care.

Aged↗
PubMed1998

Does length of hospital stay during labor and delivery influence patient satisfaction? Results from a regional study.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the relationship between patients' satisfaction with hospital obstetric care, length of stay, and patients' perceived appropriateness of the length of stay. STUDY DESIGN: A cross-sectional study. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We surveyed 27,789 women (a 58% response rate) discharged after labor and delivery from 18 hospitals in a large metropolitan region from 1992 through 1994. Patient satisfaction was assessed using the Patient Judgment System, a previously validated instrument. Our analysis focused on four scales evaluating specific aspects of care (physician care, nursing care, provision of information, and preparation for discharge) and two single-item indicators of satisfaction (overall quality and willingness to return to the hospital). RESULTS: Patients with shorter lengths of stay were more likely (P < 0.001) to perceive their stays as "too short." In addition, the six measures of satisfaction were lower (P < 0.001) in patients who perceived their stays as too short. However, the hypothesized lower satisfaction in patients with shorter stays was not observed; differences in satisfaction according to length of stay were small and of questionable practical significance. CONCLUSION: The findings suggest that patients' satisfaction with obstetric care may not depend on the absolute duration of stay but rather on whether patients perceive the length of stay to be adequate. The results are timely because of recent legislation that mandates minimum hospital stays for labor and delivery.

Adult↗
PubMed1997

Severity-adjusted mortality and length of stay in teaching and nonteaching hospitals. Results of a regional study.

CONTEXT: Major teaching hospitals are perceived as being more expensive than other hospitals and, thus, unattractive to managed care. However, little empirical data exist about their relative quality and efficiency. The current study compared severity-adjusted mortality and length of stay (LOS) in teaching and nonteaching hospitals. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: Thirty hospitals in northeast Ohio. PATIENTS: A total of 89851 consecutive eligible patients discharged in 1991 through 1993 with myocardial infarction, congestive heart failure, obstructive airway disease, gastrointestinal hemorrhage, pneumonia, or stroke. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: In-hospital mortality and LOS of patients in major teaching (n=5), minor teaching (n=6), and nonteaching (n=19) hospitals were adjusted for admission severity of illness using multivariable models based on demographic and clinical data abstracted from patients' medical records. RESULTS: The adjusted odds of death was 19% lower (95% confidence interval [CI], 2%-34%; P=.03) for patients in major teaching hospitals compared with non-teaching hospitals but was similar (95% CI, 7% lower to 28% higher; P=.28) for patients in minor teaching hospitals. The findings were generally consistent in analyses stratified according to diagnosis, age, race, predicted risk of death, and other covariates. In addition, risk-adjusted LOS was 9% lower (95% CI, 8%-10%; P<.001) among patients in major teaching hospitals relative to nonteaching hospitals but was similar (95% CI, 2% lower to 11% higher; P=.17) in minor teaching hospitals. Major teaching hospitals also cared for higher proportions of nonwhite and poorly insured patients. CONCLUSIONS: Risk-adjusted mortality and LOS were lower for patients in major teaching hospitals than for patients in minor teaching and nonteaching hospitals. If generalizable to other regions, the results provide evidence that hospital performance, as assessed by 2 commonly used indicators, may be higher in major teaching hospitals. These findings are noteworthy at a time when the viability of many major teaching hospitals is threatened by powerful health care market forces and by potential changes in federal financing of graduate medical education.

Data Collection↗
PubMed1997

A regional evaluation of variation in low-severity hospital admissions.

OBJECTIVE: Determine patient and hospital-level variation in proportions of low-severity admissions. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: Thirty hospitals in a large metropolitan region. PATIENTS: A total of 43,209 consecutive eligible patients discharged in 1991 through 1993 with congestive heart failure (n = 25,213) or pneumonia (n = 17,995). MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Admission severity of illness was measured from validated multivariable models that estimated the risk of in-hospital death; models were based on clinical data abstracted from patients' medical records. Admissions were categorized as "low severity" if the predicted risk of death was less than 1%. Nearly 15% of patients (n = 6,382) were categorized as low-severity admissions. Compared with other patients, low-severity admissions were more likely (p < .001) to be nonwhite and to have Medicaid or be uninsured. Low-severity admissions had shorter median length of stay (4 vs 7 days; p < .001), but accounted for 10% of the total number of hospital days. For congestive heart failure, proportions of low-severity admissions across hospitals ranged from 10% to 25%; 12 hospitals had rates that were significantly different (p < .01) than the overall rate of 17%. For pneumonia, proportions ranged from 3% to 22%; 12 hospitals had rates different from the overall rate of 12%. Variation across hospitals remained after adjusting for patient sociodemographic factors. CONCLUSIONS: Rates of low-severity admissions for congestive heart failure and pneumonia varied across hospitals and were higher among nonwhite and poorly insured patients. Although the current study does not identify causes of this variability, possible explanations include differences in access to ambulatory services, decisions to admit patients for clinical indications unrelated to the risk of hospital mortality, and variability in admission practices of individual physicians and hospitals. The development of protocols for ambulatory management of low-severity patients and improvement of access to outpatient care would most likely decrease the utilization of more costly hospital services.

Adult↗
PubMed1997

Declines in hospital mortality associated with a regional initiative to measure hospital performance.

To determine changes in hospital mortality that occurred in association with the dissemination of data by a regional initiative to profile hospital performance, we conducted a retrospective cohort study of patients admitted before and subsequent to dissemination of comparative data in 1992. The analysis included 101,060 consecutive eligible discharges from 30 hospitals in Northeast Ohio with eight diagnoses: acute myocardial infarction, congestive heart failure (CHF), obstructive airway disease, gastrointestinal hemorrhage, pneumonia, stroke, coronary artery bypass surgery, and lower bowel resection. Baseline (1991, N = 35,629) mortality rates were compared to rates during three subsequent periods (July-December 1992, N = 20,392; January-June 1993, N = 23,070; and July-December 1993, N = 21,969). Mortality rates were risk-adjusted using validated multivariable models based on data abstracted from patient's medical records. For all conditions, risk-adjusted mortality declined from a baseline rate of 7.5% to rates of 6.8%, 6.8%, and 6.5%, respectively, during the three subsequent periods. Using weighted linear regression analysis to estimate trends across periods, declines in mortality rates were significant for CHF (0.50% per period; P = 0.002) and pneumonia (0.38% per period; P = 0.03). We conclude that hospital mortality declined in association with the dissemination of comparative data. Although changes in hospital care were not directly examined, the results suggest that initiatives to examine provider performance may have a beneficial impact on quality of care.

Aged↗
PubMed1996

Racial variation in predicted and observed in-hospital death. A regional analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To compare observed, predicted, and risk-adjusted hospital mortality rates in white and African-American patients and to determine whether, as prior studies suggest, African-American patients would have higher predicted risks of death and similar or higher risk-adjusted mortality. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: Thirty hospitals in northeast Ohio. PATIENTS: A total of 88205 eligible patients consecutively discharged in the years 1991 through 1993 with the following 6 diagnoses: acute myocardial infarction, congestive heart failure, obstructive airways disease, gastrointestinal hemorrhage, pneumonia, and stroke. METHODS: We measured predicted risks of death at admission for each diagnosis using validated multivariable models based on standard clinical data abstracted from patients' medical records. We then adjusted in-hospital mortality rates in white and African-American patients for predicted risk of death and other covariates using logistic regression analysis. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Predicted risk of death at admission and observed hospital mortality in white and African-American patients. RESULTS: Predicted risks of death were lower (P<.001) in African Americans for 4 of the 6 diagnoses. Adjusted odds of hospital death were lower (P<.01) in African Americans for 2 of the 6 diagnoses (congestive heart failure and obstructive airways disease) and similar for the other 4 diagnoses. For all diagnoses, in aggregate, the adjusted odds of hospital death were 13% lower in African-American compared with white patients (multivariable odds ratio, 0.87; 95% confidence interval, 0.80-0.94). Findings were similar if further adjustments were made for differences in length of stay, site of hospitalization, or discharge triage practices. CONCLUSION: Contrary to our a priori hypotheses, predicted risks of death and risk-adjusted mortality rates were generally lower in African-American patients. Our finding of lower predicted risk may reflect racial differences in hospital admission practices or in access to outpatient care. However, our findings suggest that, once hospitalized, African-American patients attained similar or better outcomes, as measured by an important measure--hospital mortality.

Adult↗
PubMed1996

Care of patients with upper gastrointestinal hemorrhage in academic medical centers: a community-based comparison.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: A common perception among purchasers is that academic medical centers are inefficient and overutilize technology; however, little empirical information exists. The aim of this study was to compare treatment and outcomes of patients with upper gastrointestinal hemorrhage admitted to major teaching hospitals and other hospitals in a large metropolitan area. METHODS: Data on 3801 consecutive eligible patients admitted to five major teaching hospitals and 25 other hospitals from 1991 to 1993 were obtained by review of medical records. Admission severity of illness was measured using validated multivariable models. RESULTS: Rates of upper endoscopy were somewhat lower among the 1004 patients discharged from fellowship hospitals, compared with the other 2797 patients (82.9% vs. 85.6%; P < 0.05), and the use of other procedures was similar. Although patients admitted to fellowship hospitals tended to have a higher severity of illness, both unadjusted (6.3 +/- 9.0 vs. 7.1 +/- 7.5 days; P < 0.01) and risk-adjusted length of stay were somewhat shorter. Mortality rates were similar between hospitals, and patients admitted to fellowship hospitals were somewhat less likely to be transfused. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with upper gastrointestinal hemorrhage, teaching hospitals do not appear to provide inefficient care or overutilize expensive treatments when compared with community facilities. These findings are noteworthy at a time when viability of academic centers and fellowship training is threatened.

Academic Medical Centers↗
PubMed1996

Health quality data.

Explore the source record for details and available documents.

Health Maintenance Organizations↗
PubMed1994

Cleveland health quality choice: a model for collaborative community-based outcomes assessment.

BACKGROUND: Cleveland Health Quality Choice Coalition was established in 1989 as a voluntary, collaborative effort between hospitals, physicians, and purchasers in the Cleveland metropolitan area to assess the quality and efficiency of care in 31 hospitals. The objective of the project is to produce high-fidelity comparative hospital outcomes data that support market-based health care reform strategies. METHODS: The project reports on a broad spectrum of hospital outcomes, including patient satisfaction, in-hospital mortality, length of stay, hospital-acquired complications, and cesarean section rates for adult medical, surgical, obstetrical, and intensive care patients. Intensive care outcomes and patient satisfaction are assessed using previously validated measurement systems. Outcomes for medical, surgical, and obstetrical patients are examined using a standardized data collection and severity adjustment methodology developed by Cleveland physicians and an independent consultant. RESULTS: The project released its initial report to purchasers in April 1993, with subsequent reports scheduled for release every six months. Several policies, procedures, and programs have been instituted to ensure data quality and participant buy-in. These include initial testing and rigorous validation of all outcomes measurement systems before release of data, a commitment to continuously refine risk-adjustment methodologies, independent auditing of data reliability, and a series of user-training workshops for project participants and local news media. CONCLUSION: The early success of Cleveland Health Quality Choice Coalition demonstrates that it is possible for purchasers and providers to cooperatively assess the quality of health care on a regional basis and to institute a market-based strategy for health care reform. Further evaluation is needed to determine how performance data being reported are used by purchasers in selecting health care and by hospitals for quality improvement.

Adult↗
PubMed1994

Designing and using case mix indices.

Any assessment of clinical care in which provider performances will be compared to norms requires adjusting for differences among patient populations. Basic issues that must be addressed include: (1) specification of the population that will be adjusted for case mix; (2) selection, definition, and weighting of factors that will be used to determine case mix; (3) validation of the proposed case mix indices; and (4) application of indices to samples of interest. The authors consider each of these issues, using illustrations from the Greater Cleveland Health Quality Choice Project and other outcomes monitoring projects.

Data Collection↗
PubMed1985

Critical appraisal of the DRG system. Problem areas for DRG reimbursement in the U.S.A.

This Prospective Payment System (PPS) utilising Diagnosis Related Groups (DRGs) which was introduced for the reimbursement of acute care hospitals for Medicare patients in the U.S., was adopted primarily to control the rapidly rising costs of health care and, as an initial effort to retain the solvency of the Nation's Medicare Hospital Insurance Trust Fund. It is this factor, an overall decrease of health care dollars to health care providers and not the DRG system, which has generated the most criticism and concern. The DRG system, as a method to accomplish control of the expenditure of health care dollars and the method of implementation of this system in the United States, also generates criticism and concern from health care providers. One thing is certain, health care providers in the United States have seen just the beginning of what promises to be a rapidly changing environment driven by the need to control costs. The challenge will be to provide quality health care in a price competitive environment. This paper attempts to explore some of the criticisms and concerns of health care providers that result from the threat to reduce health care dollars and the methodology implemented to accomplish that objective.

Costs and Cost Analysis↗