Advertisement

Journal of Gastrointestinal Surgery

, Volume 23, Issue 1, pp 163–172 | Cite as

Patient Co-Morbidity and Functional Status Influence the Occurrence of Hospital Acquired Conditions More Strongly than Hospital Factors

  • Zhobin Moghadamyeghaneh
  • Michael J. Stamos
  • Lygia StewartEmail author
2018 SSAT Plenary Presentation
  • 216 Downloads

Abstract

Background

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.

Methods

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.

Results

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).

Conclusion

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.

Keywords

Hospital-acquired conditions Comorbidity Functional status Hospital factors Gastrointestinal surgery 

Notes

Author’s Contribution

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.

References

  1. 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
  2. 2.
    Lembitz A, Clarke TJ. Clarifying "never events and introducing "always events". Patient Saf Surg. 2009;3:26.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Mehtsun WT, Ibrahim AM, Diener-West M, Pronovost PJ, Makary MA. Surgical never events in the United States. Surgery. 2013;153:465–472.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Nero DC, Lipp MJ, Callahan MA. The financial impact of hospital-acquired conditions. J Health Care Finance. 2012;38:40–49.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 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. 6.
    The International Classification of Diseases Nr, Clinical Modification: ICD-9-CM. 4th ed. Washington, DC, Services USDoHaH, 1991 Aahwidc. In.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Shah NK, Farber A, Kalish JA, et al. Occurrence of "never events" after major open vascular surgery procedures. J Vasc Surg. 2016;63:738–745.e728.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Wen T, He S, Attenello F, et al. The impact of patient age and comorbidities on the occurrence of "never events" in cerebrovascular surgery: an analysis of the Nationwide Inpatient Sample. J Neurosurg. 2014;121:580–586.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Wen T, Pease M, Attenello FJ, et al. Evaluation of Effect of Weekend Admission on the Prevalence of Hospital-Acquired Conditions in Patients Receiving Cervical Fusions. World Neurosurg. 2015;84:58–68.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Lidor AO, Moran-Atkin E, Stem M, et al. Hospital-acquired conditions after bariatric surgery: we can predict, but can we prevent? Surg Endosc. 2014;28:3285–3292.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Moghadamyeghaneh Z, Chen LJ, Alameddine M, Gupta AK, Burke GW, Ciancio G. Never events and hospital-acquired conditions after kidney transplant. Can Urol Assoc J. 2017;11:E431-E436.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Shah NK, Farber A, Kalish JA, Eslami MH, Sengupta A, Doros G, Rybin D, Siracuse JJ Occurrence of "never events" after major open vascular surgery procedures. J Vasc Surg. 2016;63:738–45.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Attenello FJ, Wen T, Cen SY, Ng A, Kim-Tenser M, Sanossian N, Amar AP, Mack WJ, Incidence of "never events" among weekend admissions versus weekday admissions to US hospitals: national analysis. BMJ, 2015; 350:h1460.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    DePalma RG. Surgical quality programs in the Veterans Health Administration. Am Surg 2006;72:999–1004.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Itani KM, Fifteen years of the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program in review, Amer J Surg, 2009; 198(Suppl): S9–S18CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Lawson EH, Zingmond DS, Hall BL, Louie R, Brook RH, Ko CY. Comparison between clinical registry and medicare claims data on the classification of hospital quality of surgical care. Ann Surg. 2015;261:290–6.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Lawson EH, Louie R, Zingmond DS, Brook RH, Hall BL, Han L, Rapp M, Ko CY. A comparison of clinical registry versus administrative claims data for reporting of 30-day surgical complications. Ann Surg. 2012;256:973–81.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Liu JB, Berian JR, Chen S, Cohen ME, Bilimoria KY, Hall BL, Ko CY. Postoperative Complications and Hospital Payment: Implications for Achieving Value. J Am Coll Surg. 2017;224:779–786CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 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
  20. 20.
    Koenig L, Soltoff SA, Demiralp B, Demehin AA, Foster NE, Steinberg CR, Vaz C, Wetzel S, Xu S, Complication Rates, Hospital Size, and Bias in the CMS Hospital-Acquired Condition Reduction Program. Am J Med Qual. 2017;32:611–616.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 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
  22. 22.
    Rajaram R, Chung JW, Kinnier CV, Barnard C, Mohanty S, Pavey ES, McHugh MC, Bilimoria KY. Hospital Characteristics Associated With Penalties in the Centers for Medicare &amp; Medicaid Services Hospital-Acquired Condition Reduction Program. JAMA, 2015;314:375–83CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Dupree JM, Neimeyer J, McHugh M. An advanced look at surgical performance under Medicare's hospital-inpatient value-based purchasing program: who is winning and who is losing? J Am Coll Surg. 2014;218:1–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Gilman M, Adams EK, Hockenberry JM, Milstein AS, Wilson IB, Becker ER. Safety-net hospitals more likely than other hospitals to fare poorly under Medicare's value-based purchasing. Health Aff (Millwood). 2015;34:398–405.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Gilman M, Hockenberry JM, Adams EK, Milstein AS, Wilson IB, Becker ER. The Financial Effect of Value-Based Purchasing and the Hospital Readmissions Reduction Program on Safety-Net Hospitals in 2014: A Cohort Study. Ann Intern Med. 2015;163:427–36.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Koenig L, Soltoff SA, Demiralp B, Demehin AA, Foster NE, Steinberg CR, Vaz C, Wetzel S, Xu S. Complication Rates, Hospital Size, and Bias in the CMS Hospital-Acquired Condition Reduction Program. Am J Med Qual. 2017;32:611–616.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Moghadamyeghaneh Z, Phelan M, Smith BR, Stamos MJ. Outcomes of Open, Laparoscopic, and Robotic Abdominoperineal Resections in Patients With Rectal Cancer. Dis Colon Rectum. 2015;58(12):1123–1129.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Moghadamyeghaneh Z, Hanna MH, Carmichael JC, Pigazzi A, Stamos MJ, Mills S. Comparison of open, laparoscopic, and robotic approaches for total abdominal colectomy. Surg Endosc. 2016;30(7):2792–2798.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Moghadamyeghaneh Z, Carmichael JC, Mills S, Pigazzi A, Nguyen NT, Stamos MJ. Hand-Assisted Laparoscopic Approach in Colon Surgery. J Gastrointest Surg. 2015;19:2045–2053.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Lee GM, Kleinman K, Soumerai SB, Tse A, Cole D, Fridkin SK, Horan T, Platt R, Gay C, Kassler W, Goldmann DA, Jernigan J, Jha AK, Effect of nonpayment for preventable infections in U.S. hospitals. N Engl J Med, 2012; 367:1428–37.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. 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
  32. 32.
    Tambyah PA, Oon J. Catheter-associated urinary tract infection. Curr Opin Infect Dis. 2012;25:365–370.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Reed D, Kemmerly SA. Infection control and prevention: a review of hospital-acquired infections and the economic implications. Ochsner J. 2009;9:27–31.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Rebmann T, Greene LR. Preventing ventilator-associated pneumonia: An executive summary of the Association for Professionals in Infection Control and Epidemiology, Inc, Elimination Guide. Am J Infect Control. 2010;38:647–649.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Saint S, Wiese J, Amory JK, et al. Are physicians aware of which of their patients have indwelling urinary catheters? Am J Med. 2000;109:476–480.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Kwon S, Thompson R, Dellinger P, Yanez D, Farrohki E, Flum D. Importance of perioperative glycemic control in general surgery: a report from the Surgical Care and Outcomes Assessment Program. Ann Surg. 2013;257:8–14.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Frisch A, Chandra P, Smiley D, et al. Prevalence and clinical outcome of hyperglycemia in the perioperative period in noncardiac surgery. Diabetes Care. 2010;33(8):1783–1788.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  38. 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
  39. 39.
    Mermel LA. Prevention of intravascular catheter-related infections. Ann Intern Med. 2000;132:391–402.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    O'Grady NP, Alexander M, Burns LA, et al. Guidelines for the prevention of intravascular catheter-related infections. Clin Infect Dis. 2011;52:e162–193.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Richet H, Hubert B, Nitemberg G, et al. Prospective multicenter study of vascular-catheter-related complications and risk factors for positive central-catheter cultures in intensive care unit patients. J Clin Microbiol. 1990;28(11):2520–2525.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Church S, Robinson TN, Angles EM, Tran ZV, Wallace JI. Postoperative falls in the acute hospital setting: characteristics, risk factors, and outcomes in males. Am J Surg. 2011;201:197–202.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Robinson TN, Eiseman B, Wallace JI, et al. Redefining geriatric preoperative assessment using frailty, disability and co-morbidity. Ann Surg. 2009;250:449–455.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Dasgupta M, Dumbrell AC. Preoperative risk assessment for delirium after noncardiac surgery: a systematic review. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2006;54:1578–1589.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Robinson TN, Raeburn CD, Tran ZV, Angles EM, Brenner LA, Moss M. Postoperative delirium in the elderly: risk factors and outcomes. Ann Surg. 2009;249:173–178.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Lorence DP, Ibrahim IA. Benchmarking variation in coding accuracy across the United States. J Health Care Finance. 2003;29:29–42.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Berthelsen CL. Evaluation of coding data quality of the HCUP National Inpatient Sample. Top Health Inf Manage. 2000;21:10–23.PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of SurgeryUniversity of CaliforniaCAUSA
  2. 2.Department of SurgeryUniversity of CaliforniaIrvineUSA
  3. 3.Department of SurgerySan Francisco VA Medical CenterCAUSA

Personalised recommendations