Risk-adjusted models for adverse obstetric outcomes and variation in risk-adjusted outcomes across hospitals

Regulatory bodies and insurers evaluate hospital quality using obstetrical outcomes, however meaningful comparisons should take pre-existing patient characteristics into account. Furthermore, if risk-adjusted outcomes are consistent within a hospital, fewer measures and resources would be needed to assess obstetrical quality. Our objective was to establish risk-adjusted models for five obstetric outcomes and assess hospital performance across these outcomes

Risk-adjusted models for adverse obstetric outcomes and variation in risk-adjusted outcomes across hospitals

OBJECTIVE: Regulatory bodies and insurers evaluate hospital quality using obstetrical outcomes, however meaningful comparisons should take pre-existing patient characteristics into account. Furthermore, if risk-adjusted outcomes are consistent within a hospital, fewer measures and resources would be needed to assess obstetrical quality. Our objective was to establish risk-adjusted models for five obstetric outcomes and assess hospital performance across these outcomes. STUDY DESIGN: A cohort study of 115,502 women and their neonates born in 25 hospitals in the United States between March 2008 and February 2011. Hospitals were ranked according to their unadjusted and risk-adjusted frequency of venous thromboembolism, postpartum hemorrhage, peripartum infection, severe perineal laceration, and a composite neonatal adverse outcome. Correlations between hospital risk-adjusted outcome frequencies were assessed. RESULTS: Venous thromboembolism occurred too infrequently (0.03%, 95% CI 0.02% – 0.04%) for meaningful assessment. Other outcomes occurred frequently enough for assessment (postpartum hemorrhage 2.29% (95% CI 2.20–2.38), peripartum infection 5.06% (95% CI 4.93–5.19), severe perineal laceration at spontaneous vaginal delivery 2.16% (95% CI 2.06–2.27), neonatal composite 2.73% (95% CI 2.63–2.84)). Although there was high concordance between unadjusted and adjusted hospital rankings, several individual hospitals had an adjusted rank that was substantially different (as much as 12 rank tiers) than their unadjusted rank. None of the correlations between hospital adjusted outcome frequencies was significant. For example, the hospital with the lowest adjusted frequency of peripartum infection had the highest adjusted frequency of severe perineal laceration. CONCLUSIONS: Evaluations based on a single risk-adjusted outcome cannot be generalized to overall hospital obstetric performance

Enhanced infection prophylaxis reduces mortality in severely immunosuppressed HIV-infected adults and older children initiating antiretroviral therapy in Kenya, Malawi, Uganda and Zimbabwe: the REALITY trial

Meeting abstract FRAB0101LB from 21st International AIDS Conference 18–22 July 2016, Durban, South Africa. Introduction: Mortality from infections is high in the first 6 months of antiretroviral therapy (ART) among HIV‐infected adults and children with advanced disease in sub‐Saharan Africa. Whether an enhanced package of infection prophylaxis at ART initiation would reduce mortality is unknown. Methods: The REALITY 2×2×2 factorial open‐label trial (ISRCTN43622374) randomized ART‐naïve HIV‐infected adults and children >5 years with CD4 <100 cells/mm3. This randomization compared initiating ART with enhanced prophylaxis (continuous cotrimoxazole plus 12 weeks isoniazid/pyridoxine (anti‐tuberculosis) and fluconazole (anti‐cryptococcal/candida), 5 days azithromycin (anti‐bacterial/protozoal) and single‐dose albendazole (anti‐helminth)), versus standard‐of‐care cotrimoxazole. Isoniazid/pyridoxine/cotrimoxazole was formulated as a scored fixed‐dose combination. Two other randomizations investigated 12‐week adjunctive raltegravir or supplementary food. The primary endpoint was 24‐week mortality. Results: 1805 eligible adults (n = 1733; 96.0%) and children/adolescents (n = 72; 4.0%) (median 36 years; 53.2% male) were randomized to enhanced (n = 906) or standard prophylaxis (n = 899) and followed for 48 weeks (3.8% loss‐to‐follow‐up). Median baseline CD4 was 36 cells/mm3 (IQR: 16–62) but 47.3% were WHO Stage 1/2. 80 (8.9%) enhanced versus 108(12.2%) standard prophylaxis died before 24 weeks (adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) = 0.73 (95% CI: 0.54–0.97) p = 0.03; Figure 1) and 98(11.0%) versus 127(14.4%) respectively died before 48 weeks (aHR = 0.75 (0.58–0.98) p = 0.04), with no evidence of interaction with the two other randomizations (p > 0.8). Enhanced prophylaxis significantly reduced incidence of tuberculosis (p = 0.02), cryptococcal disease (p = 0.01), oral/oesophageal candidiasis (p = 0.02), deaths of unknown cause (p = 0.02) and (marginally) hospitalisations (p = 0.06) but not presumed severe bacterial infections (p = 0.38). Serious and grade 4 adverse events were marginally less common with enhanced prophylaxis (p = 0.06). CD4 increases and VL suppression were similar between groups (p > 0.2). Conclusions: Enhanced infection prophylaxis at ART initiation reduces early mortality by 25% among HIV‐infected adults and children with advanced disease. The pill burden did not adversely affect VL suppression. Policy makers should consider adopting and implementing this low‐cost broad infection prevention package which could save 3.3 lives for every 100 individuals treated