Comparison of the Value of Nursing Work Environments in Hospitals Across Different Levels of Patient Risk

Importance The literature suggests that hospitals with better nursing work environments provide better quality of care. Less is known about value (cost vs quality). Objectives To test whether hospitals with better nursing work environments displayed better value than those with worse nursing environments and to determine patient risk groups associated with the greatest value. Design, Setting, and Participants A retrospective matched-cohort design, comparing the outcomes and cost of patients at focal hospitals recognized nationally as having good nurse working environments and nurse-to-bed ratios of 1 or greater with patients at control group hospitals without such recognition and with nurse-to-bed ratios less than 1. This study included 25 752 elderly Medicare general surgery patients treated at focal hospitals and 62 882 patients treated at control hospitals during 2004-2006 in Illinois, New York, and Texas. The study was conducted between January 1, 2004, and November 30, 2006; this analysis was conducted from April to August 2015. Exposures Focal vs control hospitals (better vs worse nursing environment). Main Outcomes and Measures Thirty-day mortality and costs reflecting resource utilization. Results This study was conducted at 35 focal hospitals (mean nurse-to-bed ratio, 1.51) and 293 control hospitals (mean nurse-to-bed ratio, 0.69). Focal hospitals were larger and more teaching and technology intensive than control hospitals. Thirty-day mortality in focal hospitals was 4.8% vs 5.8% in control hospitals (P \u3c .001), while the cost per patient was similar: the focal-control was −$163 (95$542 to $215; P = .40), suggesting better value in the focal group. For the focal vs control hospitals, the greatest mortality benefit (17.3$941 per patient ($53 701 vs$52 760; P = .25). The greatest difference in value between focal and control hospitals appeared in patients in the second-highest risk quintile, with mortality of 4.2% vs 5.8% (P \u3c .001), with a nonsignificant cost difference of −$862 ($33 513 vs $34 375; P = .12). Conclusions and Relevance Hospitals with better nursing environments and above-average staffing levels were associated with better value (lower mortality with similar costs) compared with hospitals without nursing environment recognition and with below-average staffing, especially for higher-risk patients. These results do not suggest that improving any specific hospital’s nursing environment will necessarily improve its value, but they do show that patients undergoing general surgery at hospitals with better nursing environments generally receive care of higher value

Examining Causes of Racial Disparities in General Surgical Mortality: Hospital Quality Versus Patient Risk

BACKGROUND: Racial disparities in general surgical outcomes are known to exist but not well understood. OBJECTIVES: To determine if black-white disparities in general surgery mortality for Medicare patients are attributable to poorer health status among blacks on admission or differences in the quality of care provided by the admitting hospitals. RESEARCH DESIGN: Matched cohort study using Tapered Multivariate Matching. SUBJECTS: All black elderly Medicare general surgical patients (N=18,861) and white-matched controls within the same 6 states or within the same 838 hospitals. MEASURES: Thirty-day mortality (primary); others include in-hospital mortality, failure-to-rescue, complications, length of stay, and readmissions. RESULTS: Matching on age, sex, year, state, and the exact same procedure, blacks had higher 30-day mortality (4.0% vs. 3.5%, P\u3c0.01), in-hospital mortality (3.9% vs. 2.9%, P\u3c0.0001), in-hospital complications (64.3% vs. 56.8% P\u3c0.0001), and failure-to-rescue rates (6.1% vs. 5.1% P\u3c0.001), longer length of stay (7.2 vs. 5.8 d, P\u3c0.0001), and more 30-day readmissions (15.0% vs. 12.5%, P\u3c0.0001). Adding preoperative risk factors to the above match, there was no significant difference in mortality or failure-to-rescue, and all other outcome differences were small. Blacks matched to whites in the same hospital displayed no significant differences in mortality, failure-to-rescue, or readmissions. CONCLUSIONS: Black and white Medicare patients undergoing the same procedures with closely matched risk factors displayed similar mortality, suggesting that racial disparities in general surgical mortality are not because of differences in hospital quality. To reduce the observed disparities in surgical outcomes, the poorer health of blacks on presentation for surgery must be addressed

Characteristics Associated With Differences in Survival Among Black and White Women With Breast Cancer

Importance Difference in breast cancer survival by race is a recognized problem among Medicare beneficiaries. Objective To determine if racial disparity in breast cancer survival is primarily attributable to differences in presentation characteristics at diagnosis or subsequent treatment. Design, Setting, and Patients Comparison of 7375 black women 65 years and older diagnosed between 1991 to 2005 and 3 sets of 7375 matched white control patients selected from 99 898 white potential controls, using data for 16 US Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results (SEER) sites in the SEER-Medicare database. All patients received follow-up through December 31, 2009, and the black case patients were matched to 3 white control populations on demographics (age, year of diagnosis, and SEER site), presentation (demographics variables plus patient comorbid conditions and tumor characteristics such as stage, size, grade, and estrogen receptor status), and treatment (presentation variables plus details of surgery, radiation therapy, and chemotherapy). Main Outcomes and Measures 5-Year survival. Results The absolute difference in 5-year survival (blacks, 55.9%; whites, 68.8%) was 12.9% (95% CI, 11.5%-14.5%; P \u3c .001) in the demographics match. This difference remained unchanged between 1991 and 2005. After matching on presentation characteristics, the absolute difference in 5-year survival was 4.4% (95% CI, 2.8%-5.8%; P \u3c .001) and was 3.6% (95% CI, 2.3%-4.9%; P \u3c .001) lower for blacks than for whites matched also on treatment. In the presentation match, fewer blacks received treatment (87.4% vs 91.8%; P \u3c .001), time from diagnosis to treatment was longer (29.2 vs 22.8 days; P \u3c .001), use of anthracyclines and taxols was lower (3.7% vs 5.0%; P \u3c .001), and breast-conserving surgery without other treatment was more frequent (8.2% vs 7.3%; P = .04). Nevertheless, differences in survival associated with treatment differences accounted for only 0.81% of the 12.9% survival difference. Conclusions and Relevance In the SEER-Medicare database, differences in breast cancer survival between black and white women did not substantially change among women diagnosed between 1991 and 2005. These differences in survival appear primarily related to presentation characteristics at diagnosis rather than treatment differences

Duty Hour Reform and the Outcomes of Patients Treated by New Surgeons

Despite concerns that duty hour reform might adversely affect the performance of new surgeons, this national study found no impact on patient outcomes, including 30-day mortality rates, failure-to-rescue, length of stay, and use of intensive care units. These findings should allay fears that reduced work hours during residency would produce surgeons less prepared for practice than their more experienced colleagues

Adjustment for Atherosclerosis Diagnosis Distorts the Effects of Percutaneous Coronary Intervention and the Ranking of Hospital Performance.

BackgroundCoronary atherosclerosis raises the risk of acute myocardial infarction (AMI), and is usually included in AMI risk-adjustment models. Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) does not cause atherosclerosis, but may contribute to the notation of atherosclerosis in administrative claims. We investigated how adjustment for atherosclerosis affects rankings of hospitals that perform PCI.Methods and resultsThis was a retrospective cohort study of 414 715 Medicare beneficiaries hospitalized for AMI between 2009 and 2011. The outcome was 30-day mortality. Regression models determined the association between patient characteristics and mortality. Rankings of the 100 largest PCI and non-PCI hospitals were assessed with and without atherosclerosis adjustment. Patients admitted to PCI hospitals or receiving interventional cardiology more frequently had an atherosclerosis diagnosis. In adjustment models, atherosclerosis was associated, implausibly, with a 42% reduction in odds of mortality (odds ratio=0.58, P<0.0001). Without adjustment for atherosclerosis, the number of expected lives saved by PCI hospitals increased by 62% (P<0.001). Hospital rankings also changed: 72 of the 100 largest PCI hospitals had better ranks without atherosclerosis adjustment, while 77 of the largest non-PCI hospitals had worse ranks (P<0.001).ConclusionsAtherosclerosis is almost always noted in patients with AMI who undergo interventional cardiology but less often in medically managed patients, so adjustment for its notation likely removes part of the effect of interventional treatment. Therefore, hospitals performing more extensive imaging and more PCIs have higher atherosclerosis diagnosis rates, making their patients appear healthier and artificially reducing the expected mortality rate against which they are benchmarked. Thus, atherosclerosis adjustment is detrimental to hospitals providing more thorough AMI care

A National Comparison of Operative Outcomes of New and Experienced Surgeons.

ObjectiveTo determine whether outcomes achieved by new surgeons are attributable to inexperience or to differences in the context in which care is delivered and patient complexity.BackgroundAlthough prior studies suggest that new surgeon outcomes are worse than those of experienced surgeons, factors that underlie these phenomena are poorly understood.MethodsA nationwide observational tapered matching study of outcomes of Medicare patients treated by new and experienced surgeons in 1221 US hospitals (2009-2013). The primary outcome studied is 30-day mortality. Secondary outcomes were examined.ResultsIn total, 694,165 patients treated by 8503 experienced surgeons were matched to 68,036 patients treated by 2119 new surgeons working in the same hospitals. New surgeons' patients were older (25.8% aged ≥85 vs 16.3%,P<0.0001) with more emergency admissions (53.9% vs 25.8%,P<0.0001) than experienced surgeons' patients. Patients of new surgeons had a significantly higher baseline 30-day mortality rate compared with patients of experienced surgeons (6.2% vs 4.5%,P<0.0001;OR 1.42 (1.33, 1.52)). The difference remained significant after matching the types of operations performed (6.2% vs 5.1%, P<0.0001; OR 1.24 (1.16, 1.32)) and after further matching on a combination of operation type and emergency admission status (6.2% vs 5.6%, P=0.0007; OR 1.12 (1.05, 1.19)). After matching on operation type, emergency admission status, and patient complexity, the difference between new and experienced surgeons' patients' 30-day mortality became indistinguishable (6.2% vs 5.9%,P=0.2391;OR 1.06 (0.97, 1.16)).ConclusionsAmong Medicare beneficiaries, the majority of the differences in outcomes between new and experienced surgeons are related to the context in which care is delivered and patient complexity rather than new surgeon inexperience

Twelve-Month Outcomes After Transplant of Hepatitis C-Infected Kidneys Into Uninfected Recipients A Single-Group Trial

Background: Organs from hepatitis C virus (HCV)-infected deceased donors are often discarded. Preliminary data from 2 small trials, including THINKER-1 (Transplanting Hepatitis C kidneys Into Negative KidnEy Recipients), suggested that HCV-infected kidneys could be safely transplanted into HCV-negative patients. However, intermediate-term data on quality of life and renal function are needed to counsel patients about risk. Objective: To describe 12-month HCV treatment outcomes, estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR), and quality of life for the 10 kidney recipients in THINKER-1 and 6-month data on 10 additional recipients. Design: Open-label, nonrandomized trial. (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02743897) Setting: Single center. Participants: 20 HCV-negative transplant candidates. Intervention: Participants underwent transplant with kidneys infected with genotype 1 HCV and received elbasvir-grazoprevir on posttransplant day 3. Measurements: The primary outcome was HCV cure. Exploratory outcomes included 1) RAND-36 Physical Component Summary (PCS) and Mental Component Summary (MCS) quality-of-life scores at enrollment and after transplant, and 2) posttransplant renal function, which was compared in a 1:5 matched sample with recipients of HCV-negative kidneys. Results: The mean age of THINKER participants was 56.3 years (SD, 6.7), 70% were male, and 40% were black. All 20 participants achieved HCV cure. Hepatic and renal complications were transient or were successfully managed. Mean PCS and MCS quality-of-life scores decreased at 4 weeks; PCS scores then increased above pretransplant values, whereas MCS scores returned to baseline values. Estimated GFRs were similar between THINKER participants and matched recipients of HCV-negative kidneys at 6 months (median, 67.5 vs. 66.2 mL/min/1.73m(2); 95% CI for between-group difference, -4.2 to 7.5 mL/min/1.73m(2)) and 12 months (median, 72.8 vs. 67.2 mL/min/1.73m(2); CI for between-group difference, -7.2 to 9.8 mL/min/1.73m(2)). Limitation: Small trial. Conclusion: Twenty HCV-negative recipients of HCV-infected kidneys experienced HCV cure, good quality of life, and excellent renal function. Kidneys from HCV-infected donors may be a valuable transplant resource