• 한국의료질향상학회지
• /
• 제7권2호
• /
• pp.218-228
• /
• 2000

Background : Among 'structure', 'process' and 'outcome' approaches, outcome evaluation is considered as the most direct and best approach to assess the quality of health care providers. Risk-adjustment is an essential method to compare outcome across providers. This study has aims to judge performance of hospitals by severity adjusted mortality rates of coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery. Methods : Medical records of 584 patients who got the CABG surgery in 6 general hospitals during 1996 and 1997 were reviewed by trained nurses. The MedisGroups was used to quantify severity of patients. The predictive probability of death was calculated for each patient in the sample from a multivariate logistic regression model including the severity score, age and sex. For evaluation of hospital performance, we calculated ratio of observed number to expected number of deaths and z score [(observed number of deaths - expected number of deaths)/square root of the variance in the number of deaths], and compared observed mortality rate with confidence interval of adjusted mortality rate for each hospital. Results : The overall in-hospital mortality was 7.0%, ranged from 2.7% to 15.7% by hospital. After severity adjustment the mortality by hospital was from 2.7% to 10.7%. One hospital with poor performance was distinctly divided from others with good performance. Conclusion : In conclusion, severity-adjusted mortality rate of CABG surgery might be applied as an indicator for hospital performance evaluation in Korea. But more pilot studies and improvement of methodologies has to be done to use it as quality indicator.

• 한국의료질향상학회지
• /
• 제10권2호
• /
• pp.164-175
• /
• 2003

Objectives: To evaluate the performance of models to predict AMI patients death using severity adjustment measures in Korea. Methods: Medical records of 861 patients treated by AMI in 7 general hospitals during 1996 and 1997 were reviewed by trained nurses. We measured the severity of patients by APACHE III, MedisGroups, CSI and DS. Using each severity method a predictive mortality for each patient was calculated from a logistic regression model including the severity score. The statistical performance of each severity method model was evaluated by using c-statistics and R2. For each hospital, z scores compared actual and expected mortality rates. Results: The overall in-hospital mortality was 14.5%, ranged from 10.0% to 22.2%. The distributions of severity scores for each method was significantly different by hospitals. The four severity-adjusted models to predict AMI patients death varied in their statistical performance for discrimination power of patients death. Order of Severity-adjusted mortality rates and z scores by four severity measures was different. Conclusion: Severity-adjusted mortality rates of AMI patients might be applied as an indicator for hospital performance evaluation in Korea. Because different severity methods frequently produce different impressions about relative hospital performance, more studies has to be done to use it as quality indicator and more attention should be paid to select appropriate severity measures.

• Journal of Preventive Medicine and Public Health
• /
• 제34권3호
• /
• pp.244-252
• /
• 2001

Objective : Health insurers and policy makers are increasingly examining the hospital mortality rate as an indicator of hospital quality and performance. To be meaningful, a risk-adjustment of the death rates must be implemented. This study reviewed 5 severity measurement methods and applied them to the same data set to determine whether judgments regarding the severity-adjusted hospital mortality rates were sensitive to the specific severity measure. Methods : The medical records of 584 patients who underwent coronary artery bypass graft surgery in 6 general hospitals during 1996 and 1997 were reviewed by trained nurses. The MedisGroups, Disease Staging, Computerized Severity Index, APACHE III and KDRG were used to quantify severity of the patients. The predictive probability of death was calculated for each patient in the sample from a multivariate logistic regression model including the severity score, age and sex to evaluate the hospitals' performance, the ratio of the observed number of deaths to the expected number for each hospital was calculated. Results : The overall in-hospital mortality rate was 7.0%, ranging from 2.7% to 15.7% depending on the particular hospital. After the severity adjustment, the mortality rates for each hospital showed little difference according to the severity measure. The 5 severity measurement methods varied in their statistical performance. All had a higher c statistic and $R^2$ than the model containing only age and sex. There was a little difference in the relative hospital performance evaluation by the severity measure. Conclusion : These results suggest that judgments regarding a hospital's performance based on severity adjusted mortality can be sensitive to the severity measurement method. Although the 5 severity measures regarding hospital performance concurred, more often than would be expected by chance, the assessment of an individual hospital mortality rates varied by the different severity measurement method used.