Patient Co-Morbidity and Functional Status Influence the Occurrence of Hospital Acquired Conditions More Strongly than Hospital Factors
- 216 Downloads
Never events (NE) and hospital-acquired conditions (HAC) are used by Medicare/Medicaid Services to define hospital performance measures that dictate payments/penalties. Pre-op patient comorbidity may significantly influence HAC development.
We studied 8,118,615 patients from the NIS database (2002–2012) who underwent upper/lower gastrointestinal and/or hepatopancreatobiliary procedures. Multivariate analysis, using logistic regression, was used to identify HAC and NE risk factors.
A total of 63,762 (0.8%) HAC events and 1645 (0.02%) NE were reported. A total of 99.9% of NE were retained foreign body. Most frequent HAC were: pressure ulcer stage III/IV (36.7%), poor glycemic control (26.9%), vascular catheter-associated infection (20.3%), and catheter-associated urinary tract infection (13.7%). Factors correlating with HAC included: open surgical approach (AOR: 1.25, P < 0.01), high-risk patients with significant comorbidity [severe loss function pre-op (AOR: 6.65, P < 0.01), diabetes with complications (AOR: 2.40, P < 0.01), paraplegia (AOR: 3.14, P < 0.01), metastatic cancer (AOR: 1.30, P < 0.01), age > 70 (AOR: 1.09, P < 0.01)], hospital factors [small vs. large (AOR: 1.07, P < 0.01), non-teaching vs teaching (AOR: 1.10, P < 0.01), private profit vs. non-profit/governmental (AOR: 1.20, P < 0.01)], severe preoperative mortality risk (AOR: 3.48, P < 0.01), and non-elective admission (AOR: 1.38, P < 0.01). HAC were associated with increased: hospitalization length (21 vs 7 days, P < 0.01), hospital charges ($164,803 vs $54,858, P < 0.01), and mortality (8 vs 3%, AOR: 1.14, P < 0.01).
HAC incidence was highest among patients with severe comorbid conditions. While small, non-teaching, and for-profit hospitals had increased HAC, the strongest HAC risks were non-modifiable patient factors (preoperative loss function, diabetes, paraplegia, advanced age, etc.). This data questions the validity of using HAC as hospital performance measures, since hospitals caring for these complex patients would be unduly penalized. CMS should consider patient comorbidity as a crucial factor influencing HAC development.
KeywordsHospital-acquired conditions Comorbidity Functional status Hospital factors Gastrointestinal surgery
Moghadamyeghaneh Z: Conceived and designed the analysis; collected the data; contributed data or analysis tools; performed the analysis; wrote the paper, approval of final version, accountable for all aspects of the work.
Stamos MJ: Contributed to design of analysis, critical revision, edited paper, approval of final version.
Stewart L: Conceived and designed the analysis, critical revision, co-wrote and edited paper, approval of final version, accountable for all aspects of the work.
- 1.Teufack SG, Campbell P, Jabbour P, Maltenfort M, Evans J, Ratliff JK. Potential financial impact of restriction in "never event" and periprocedural hospital-acquired condition reimbursement at a tertiary neurosurgical center: a single-institution prospective study. J Neurosurg. 2010;112:249–256.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 5.HCUP Nationwide Inpatient Sample (NIS). Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project (HCUP). 2000–2011. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, Rockville, MD.http://www.hcup-us.ahrq.gov/nisoverview.jsp. In.Google Scholar
- 6.The International Classification of Diseases Nr, Clinical Modification: ICD-9-CM. 4th ed. Washington, DC, Services USDoHaH, 1991 Aahwidc. In.Google Scholar
- 19.Winters BD, Bharmal A, Wilson RF, Zhang A, Engineer L, Defoe D, Bass EB, Dy S, Pronovost PJ Validity of the Agency for Health Care Research and Quality Patient Safety Indicators and the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Hospital-acquired Conditions: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Med Care. 2016;54:1105–1111CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 21.Shackford SR, Cipolle MD, Badiee J, Mosby DL, Knudson MM, Lewis PR, McDonald VS, Olson EJ, Thompson KA, Van Gent JM, Zander AL. Determining the magnitude of surveillance bias in the assessment of lower extremity deep venous thrombosis: A prospective observational study of two centers. J Trauma Acute Care Surg. 2016;80:734–740 9; disc –1.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 31.Guggenbichler JP, Assadian O, Boeswald M, Kramer A. Incidence and clinical implication of nosocomial infections associated with implantable biomaterials - catheters, ventilator-associated pneumonia, urinary tract infections. GMS Krankenhhyg Interdiszip. 2011;6(1):Doc18.Google Scholar
- 38.Arabi YM, Dabbagh OC, Tamim HM, Al-Shimemeri AA, Memish ZA, Haddad SH, Syed SJ, Giridhar HR, Rishu AH, Al-Daker MO, Kahoul SH, Britts RJ, Sakkijha MH, Intensive versus conventional insulin therapy: A randomized controlled trial in medical and surgical critically ill patients Crit Care Med, 2008; 36: 3190–3197CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar