Evaluating quality indicators for patients with community-acquired pneumonia

Do hospitals provide lower quality of care to black patients for pneumonia?

OBJECTIVES

Recent studies reported lower quality of care for black vs. white patients with community-acquired pneumonia and suggested that disparities persist at the individual hospital level. We examined racial differences in emergency department and intensive care unit care processes to determine whether differences persist after adjusting for case-mix and variation in care across hospitals.

DESIGN

Prospective, observational cohort study.

SETTING

Twenty-eight U.S. hospitals.

PATIENTS

Patients with community-acquired pneumonia: 1738 white and 352 black patients.

INTERVENTIONS

None.

MEASUREMENTS

We compared care quality based on antibiotic receipt within 4 hrs and adherence to American Thoracic Society antibiotic guidelines, and intensity based on intensive care unit admission and mechanical ventilation use. Using random effects and generalized estimating equations models, we adjusted for case-mix and clustering of racial groups within hospitals and estimated odds ratios for differences in care within and across hospitals.

MAIN RESULTS

Black patients were less likely to receive antibiotics within 4 hrs (odds ratio, 0.55; 95% confidence interval, 0.43-0.70; p < .001) and less likely to receive guideline-adherent antibiotics (odds ratio, 0.72; 95% confidence interval, 0.57-0.91; p = .006). These differences were attenuated after adjusting for casemix (odds ratio, 0.59; 95% confidence interval; 0.46-0.76 and 0.84; 95% confidence interval, 0.66 -1.09). Within hospitals, black and white patients received similar care quality (odds ratio, 1; 95% confidence interval, 0.97-1.04 and 1; 95% confidence interval, 0.97-1.03). However, hospitals that served a greater proportion of black patients were less likely to provide timely antibiotics (odds ratio, 0.84; 95% confidence interval, 0.78-0.90). Black patients were more likely to receive mechanical ventilation (odds ratio, 1.57; 95% confidence interval, 1.02-2.42; p = .042). Again, within hospitals, black and white subjects were equally likely to receive mechanical ventilation (odds ratio, 1; 95% confidence interval, .94-1.06) and hospitals that served a greater proportion of black patients were more likely to institute mechanical ventilation (odds ratio, 1.13; 95% confidence interval, 1.02-1.25).

CONCLUSIONS

Black patients appear to receive lower quality and higher intensity of care in crude analyses. However, these differences were explained by different case-mix and variation in care across hospitals. Within the same hospital, no racial differences in care were observed.

Identifying best practices in dialysis care: results of cognitive interviews and a national survey of dialysis providers

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Because there is wide variation in case-mix adjusted outcomes across dialysis facilities, it is possible that top-performing facilities use practices not shared by others. We sought to catalogue "best practices" that may account for interfacility variations in outcomes.

DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, & MEASUREMENTS

This multidisciplinary study identified candidate best practices in dialysis through a staged process, including systematic review, cognitive interviews, and a national "virtual focus group" of dialysis providers. The resulting candidate practices were rank-ordered by perceived importance as determined by mean RAND Appropriateness Scores from a national survey of nephrologists, nurses, and opinion leaders.

RESULTS

A total of 155 candidate best practices were identified. Among these, respondents believed dialysis outcomes are most strongly related to 1) characteristics of multidisciplinary care conferences, 2) technician proficiency in protecting vascular access, 3) training of nurses to provide education in fluid management, vascular access, and nutrition, 4) use of random and blinded audits of staff performance, and 5) communication and teamwork among staff. In contrast, there was wide disagreement about the importance of facility-based health maintenance practices, optimal staffing ratios, frequency of dialysis-based physician visits, and optimal frequency of multidisciplinary care.

CONCLUSIONS

This study provides a "conceptual map" of candidate dialysis best practices and highlights areas of general agreement and disagreement. These findings can help the dialysis community think critically about what may define "best practice" and provide targets for future research in quality improvement.

Improving HIV screening and receipt of results by nurse-initiated streamlined counseling and rapid testing

BACKGROUND

HIV testing is cost-effective in unselected general medical populations, yet testing rates among those at risk remain low, even among those with regular primary care. HIV rapid testing is effective in many healthcare settings, but scant research has been done within primary care settings or within the US Department of Veteran's Affairs Healthcare System.

OBJECTIVES

We evaluated three methods proven effective in other diseases/settings: nurse standing orders for testing, streamlined counseling, and HIV rapid testing.

DESIGN

Randomized, controlled trial with three intervention models: model A (traditional counseling/testing); model B (nurse-initiated screening, traditional counseling/testing); model C (nurse-initiated screening, streamlined counseling/rapid testing).

PARTICIPANTS

Two hundred fifty-one patients with primary/urgent care appointments in two VA clinics in the same city (one large urban hospital, one freestanding outpatient clinic in a high HIV prevalence area).

MEASUREMENTS

Rates of HIV testing and receipt of results; sexual risk reduction; HIV knowledge improvement.

RESULTS

Testing rates were 40.2% (model A), 84.5% (model B), and 89.3% (model C; p = <.01). Test result receipt rates were 14.6% (model A), 31.0% (model B), 79.8% (model C; all p = <.01). Sexual risk reduction and knowledge improvement did not differ significantly between counseling methods.

CONCLUSIONS

Streamlined counseling with rapid testing significantly increased testing and receipt rates over current practice without changes in risk behavior or posttest knowledge. Increased testing and receipt of results could lead to earlier disease identification, increased treatment, and reduced morbidity/mortality. Policymakers should consider streamlined counseling/rapid testing when implementing routine HIV testing into primary/urgent care.

[Evaluation of clinical practice in patients admitted with community-acquired pneumonia over a 4-year period]

OBJECTIVE

Since March 2000 we have been using a clinical practice guideline in the management of patients diagnosed with community-acquired pneumonia (CAP). The objective of this study was to analyze the evolution of quality of care received by these patients.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This was a prospective observational study comparing the process of care and outcomes of 4 consecutive 1-year periods (March 1, 2000 through February 29, 2004) in patients admitted for CAP.

RESULTS

Over the 4 years studied, the following statistically significant trends were observed: reductions in hospital admissions (P< .001), length of hospital stay (P< .05), and total duration of antibiotic treatment (P< .05); and increases in the coverage of atypical pathogens (P< .001) and administration of antibiotics within 8 hours of hospital arrival (P< .001). No significant differences were found in readmissions within 30 days, or in-hospital and 30-day mortality. Two other areas for improvement were also identified: a low percentage of admissions to the intensive care unit (4.4%) and the rate of unnecessary hospitalization of low-risk patients (36.8%).

CONCLUSIONS

Systematic monitoring of the indicators of our clinical guidelines provided us with information about our clinical practice and facilitated an evaluation of the same. Many of these indicators were found to have evolved favorably and areas of improvement were identified.

Understanding variation in quality of antibiotic use for community-acquired pneumonia: effect of patient, professional and hospital factors

OBJECTIVES

To develop effective and targeted interventions to improve care for patients with community-acquired pneumonia (CAP), insight is needed into the factors that influence the quality of antibiotic use. Therefore, we measured the performance of nine quality indicators and studied determinants of variation in the quality of antibiotic use.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Data on 498 prospectively included patients with CAP from eight medium-sized Dutch hospitals were extracted from the medical charts. Outcomes of nine indicators were calculated using previously constructed algorithms. Multilevel logistic regression analysis was performed to explain differences in performance rates at the patient, doctor and hospital level.

RESULTS

Performance indicators were generally moderate. Markers of severe illness were found to be positive predictors of timely administration of antibiotics (low oxygen saturation on admission OR 1.11; 95% CI: 1.04--1.19) and obtaining blood samples for culture (low sodium concentration on admission OR 1.10; 95% CI: 1.03--1.16). Recent outpatient antibiotic therapy (OR 0.46; 95% CI: 0.26--0.80) and presence of a hospital antibiotic committee (OR 0.27; 95% CI: 0.08--0.90) were negatively associated with guideline-adherent empirical therapy. The main positive predictor of timely administration of antibiotics (within 4 h) was antibiotic administration in the Emergency Department (ED) (OR 3.9; 95% CI: 1.96--8.73).

CONCLUSIONS

We gained new insights into factors that determine quality of antibiotic prescription in hospitals. Treatment in the ED, rather than in the ward, will result in earlier administration of antibiotics. Guidelines should clarify preferred antibiotic management of patients who have received antibiotics prior to admission. Hospital-based structures aimed at quality improvement, such as antibiotic committees, do not necessarily lead to better adherence to national standards. Efforts should be made to encourage these committees to implement national guidelines at a local level.

Quality of antibiotic use for lower respiratory tract infections at hospitals: (how) can we measure it?

BACKGROUND

To assess and improve the quality of antibiotic use in patients with community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) and acute exacerbation of chronic bronchitis or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (AECB), a valid set of quality indicators is required. This set should also be applicable in practice.

METHODS

Guidelines and literature were reviewed to derive potential indicators for quality of antibiotic use in treating hospitalized patients with lower respiratory tract infection (LRTI). To assess the evidence base of each indicator, a literature review was performed. Grade A recommendations were considered valid. For grade B-D recommendations, an expert panel performed a consensus procedure on the indicator's relevance to patient health, reduction of antimicrobial resistance, and cost containment. To test applicability in practice, feasibility, opportunity for improvement, reliability, and case-mix stability were determined for a data set of 899 hospitalized patients with LRTI.

RESULTS

None of the potential indicators from guidelines and literature were supported by grade A evidence. Nineteen indicators were selected by consensus procedure (12 indicators for CAP and 7 indicators for AECB). Lack of feasibility and of opportunity for improvement led to the exclusion of 4 indicators. A final set of 15 indicators was defined (9 indicators for CAP and 6 indicators for AECB).

CONCLUSIONS

A valid set of quality indicators for antibiotic use in hospitalized patients with LRTI was developed by combining evidence and expert opinion in a carefully planned procedure. Subjecting indicators to an applicability test is essential before using them in quality-improvement projects. In our demonstration setting, 4 of the 19 indicators were inapplicable in practice.

[Patients hospitalized with community-acquired pneumonia: a comparative study of outcomes by medical specialty area]

OBJECTIVE

Variability in the management of patients hospitalized with community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) is attributable to many factors. The objective of this study was to determine whether such variability is influenced by the medical specialty area where the patient is treated.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

The treatment and outcomes for a random sample of patients with CAP admitted to 4 hospitals over 2 periods (1 year starting March 1, 1998, and 1.5 years starting March 1, 2000) were compared by medical specialty department. Multiple linear and logistic regression models were used to analyze differences.

RESULTS

Differences were found between departments in the coverage of atypical pathogens (P<.001). The adjusted mean length of stay in hospital varied between 6.8 and 9.1 days (P<.01), and the duration of intravenous treatment varied between 4.6 and 7.3 days (P<.05). Adjusted models showed that mortality in hospital and at 30 days was significantly higher for patients treated in internal medicine departments (odds ratios, 2.1 and 2, respectively) than for those treated in pulmonology departments.

CONCLUSIONS

Interdepartmental differences were observed in how patients hospitalized with CAP were treated and in the outcomes achieved. This variation is probably influenced by the differences that were found in the use of antibiotics.

The evolving science of quality measurement for hospitals: implications for studies of competition and consolidation

The literature on hospital competition and quality is young; most empirical studies have focused on few conditions and outcomes. Measures of in-hospital mortality and complications are susceptible to bias from unmeasured severity and transfer/discharge practices. Only one research team has evaluated related process and outcome measures, and none has exploited chart-review or patient survey-based data. Prior studies have generated inconsistent findings, suggesting the need for additional research. We describe the strengths and limitations of various approaches to quality measurement, summarize how quality has been operationalized in studies of hospital competition, outline three mechanisms by which competition may affect hospital quality, and propose measures appropriate for testing each mechanism.

Predicting Bacteremia in Patients with Community-Acquired Pneumonia

It is recommended that blood cultures be performed on all patients admitted to the hospital with pneumonia. Questions regarding the cost-effectiveness of this practice have emerged. We used data on 13,043 Medicare patients hospitalized with pneumonia to determine predictors of bacteremia. Predictors included recent antibiotic treatment, liver disease, and three vital-sign and three laboratory abnormalities. Patients were stratified into three groups on the basis of the likelihood of bacteremia. We then created a decision support tool that recommends performing no blood cultures on patients with low likelihood of bacteremia, one blood culture on patients with moderate likelihood of bacteremia, and two blood cultures on patients with higher likelihood of bacteremia. This tool was then applied to a validation cohort of 12,771 patients with pneumonia. Use of the decision support tool would result in 38% fewer blood cultures being performed when compared with the standard practice of performing two blood cultures for each patient and identified 88 to 89% of patients with bacteremia. A simplified tool performed similarly overall but was less sensitive than was the first tool among pneumonia severity index Class V patients. These tools may allow clinicians to target patients with pneumonia in whom blood cultures are most likely to yield a pathogen.