Article Text

Download PDFPDF

Original research
The Dutch Hospital Standardised Mortality Ratio (HSMR) method and cardiac surgery: benchmarking in a national cohort using hospital administration data versus a clinical database
  1. S Siregar1,
  2. M E Pouw2,
  3. K G M Moons3,
  4. M I M Versteegh4,
  5. M L Bots3,
  6. Y van der Graaf3,
  7. C J Kalkman2,
  8. L A van Herwerden1,
  9. R H H Groenwold3
  1. 1Department of Cardio-Thoracic Surgery, University Medical Centre Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
  2. 2Department of Anesthesiology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
  3. 3Julius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
  4. 4Department of Cardio-Thoracic Surgery, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands
  1. Correspondence to Dr Sabrina Siregar, Department of Cardio-Thoracic Surgery, University Medical Centre Utrecht, Utrecht 3508GA, The Netherlands; s.siregar{at}umcutrecht.nl

Abstract

Objective To compare the accuracy of data from hospital administration databases and a national clinical cardiac surgery database and to compare the performance of the Dutch hospital standardised mortality ratio (HSMR) method and the logistic European System for Cardiac Operative Risk Evaluation, for the purpose of benchmarking of mortality across hospitals.

Methods Information on all patients undergoing cardiac surgery between 1 January 2007 and 31 December 2010 in 10 centres was extracted from The Netherlands Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery database and the Hospital Discharge Registry. The number of cardiac surgery interventions was compared between both databases. The European System for Cardiac Operative Risk Evaluation and hospital standardised mortality ratio models were updated in the study population and compared using the C-statistic, calibration plots and the Brier-score.

Results The number of cardiac surgery interventions performed could not be assessed using the administrative database as the intervention code was incorrect in 1.4–26.3%, depending on the type of intervention. In 7.3% no intervention code was registered. The updated administrative model was inferior to the updated clinical model with respect to discrimination (c-statistic of 0.77 vs 0.85, p<0.001) and calibration (Brier Score of 2.8% vs 2.6%, p<0.001, maximum score 3.0%). Two average performing hospitals according to the clinical model became outliers when benchmarking was performed using the administrative model.

Conclusions In cardiac surgery, administrative data are less suitable than clinical data for the purpose of benchmarking. The use of either administrative or clinical risk-adjustment models can affect the outlier status of hospitals. Risk-adjustment models including procedure-specific clinical risk factors are recommended.

  • Cardiac Surgery

This is an Open Access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 3.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/

View Full Text

Statistics from Altmetric.com

Request Permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

Linked Articles