Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

The risks of risk adjustment

L I Iezzoni1

  • 1Department of Medicine, the Charles A. Dana Research Institute, Harvard Medical School, and Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston, MA 02215, USA.

JAMA
|November 25, 1997
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Current pregnancy among women with spinal cord injury: findings from the US national spinal cord injury database.

Spinal cord·2015
Same author

Working-age persons with multiple sclerosis and access to disease-modifying medications.

Multiple sclerosis (Houndmills, Basingstoke, England)·2007
Same author

Health, disability, and life insurance experiences of working-age persons with multiple sclerosis.

Multiple sclerosis (Houndmills, Basingstoke, England)·2007
Same author

Targeting health care improvement for persons with disabilities.

International journal for quality in health care : journal of the International Society for Quality in Health Care·2003
Same author

Physician-reviewers' perceptions and judgments about quality of care.

International journal for quality in health care : journal of the International Society for Quality in Health Care·2001
Same author

Using diagnoses to describe populations and predict costs.

Health care financing review·2001

Hospital risk adjustment methods vary, and different severity measures can lead to conflicting conclusions about hospital performance. Severity-adjusted mortality rates alone may not accurately reflect true quality differences.

Area of Science:

  • Health Services Research
  • Medical Informatics
  • Quality Improvement

Background:

  • Risk adjustment is crucial for comparing patient outcomes across hospitals.
  • Current hospital report cards utilize diverse risk adjustment methodologies.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To review the historical development and current practices of risk adjustment for hospital death rates.
  • To analyze the implications of using risk-adjusted mortality comparisons for assessing healthcare quality.

Main Methods:

  • Examined severity measures used for risk-adjusting hospital death rates nationally.
  • Compared commercial severity measures using a database of 47,000+ adult admissions across four conditions: AMI, CABG, pneumonia, and stroke.
  • Employed logistic regression to predict in-hospital mortality and calculated z-scores to compare observed vs. expected death rates per hospital.

Related Experiment Videos

Main Results:

  • Disease Staging, APR-DRGs, and MedisGroups showed varying performance in predicting mortality across conditions.
  • Different severity measures produced divergent predictions of death probabilities and disagreed on hospital performance rankings (low/high z-scores).
  • Agreement on identifying high- or low-mortality hospitals was often better between unadjusted rates and severity-adjusted rates than between different severity measures.

Conclusions:

  • Patient severity does not fully account for observed differences in hospital death rates.
  • The choice of severity measure significantly impacts the perception of relative hospital performance.
  • Reliance solely on severity-adjusted mortality rates is insufficient for accurately identifying variations in hospital quality.