Related Experiment Video
Updated: May 10, 2026
Inverse Probability of Treatment Weighting (Propensity Score) using the Military Health System Data Repository and National Death Index
Published on: January 8, 2020
Impact of public reporting and outlier status identification on percutaneous coronary intervention case selection in
James M McCabe1, Karen E Joynt, Frederick G P Welt
1Division of Cardiovascular Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts 02115, USA. mccabe@aya.yale.edu
Objectives:
This study sought to evaluate the impact of public reporting of hospitals as negative outliers on percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) case-mix selection.
Background:
Public reporting of risk-adjusted in-hospital mortality after PCI is intended to improve outcomes. However, public labeling of negative outliers based on risk-adjusted mortality rates may detrimentally affect hospitals' willingness to care for high-risk patients.
Methods:
We used generalized estimating equations to examine expected in-hospital mortality rates for 116,227 PCI patients at all nonfederally funded Massachusetts hospitals performing PCI from 2003 to 2010. The main outcome measure was the change in predicted in-hospital mortality rates per hospital after outlier status identification.
Results:
The prevalence-weighted mean expected mortality for all PCI cases during the study period was 1.38 ± 0.36% (5.3 ± 1.96% for all shock or ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction patients, 0.58 ± 0.19% for all not shock, not ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction patients). After public identification as a negative outlier institution, there was an 18% relative reduction (absolute 0.25% reduction) in predicted mortality among PCI patients at outlier institutions (95% confidence interval: -0.04 to -0.46%, p = 0.021) compared with nonoutlier institutions. Throughout the study period, there was an additional 37% relative (0.51% absolute) reduction in the predicted mortality risk among all PCI patients in Massachusetts attributable to secular changes since the onset of public reporting (95% confidence interval: -0.20 to -0.83, p = 0.002).
Conclusions:
The risk profile of PCI patients at outlier institutions was significantly lower after public identification compared with nonoutlier institutions, suggesting that risk-aversive behaviors among PCI operators at outlier institutions may be an unintended consequence of public reporting in Massachusetts.
