Download PDF
Methods Inf Med 1998; 37(02): 192-200
DOI: 10.1055/s-0038-1634511
Original Article
Schattauer GmbH

Evaluation of Complication Rates after Coronary Artery Bypass Surgery using Administrative Data

W. A. Ghali   1
1   Health Care Research Unit, Section of General Internal Medicine, Evans Department of Medicine, Boston Medical Center, Boston, MA,USA
,
R. E. Hall   1
1   Health Care Research Unit, Section of General Internal Medicine, Evans Department of Medicine, Boston Medical Center, Boston, MA,USA
,
A. S. Ash
1   Health Care Research Unit, Section of General Internal Medicine, Evans Department of Medicine, Boston Medical Center, Boston, MA,USA
,
A. K. Rosen   1
1   Health Care Research Unit, Section of General Internal Medicine, Evans Department of Medicine, Boston Medical Center, Boston, MA,USA
,
M. A. Moskowitz
1   Health Care Research Unit, Section of General Internal Medicine, Evans Department of Medicine, Boston Medical Center, Boston, MA,USA
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History

Publication Date:
07 February 2018 (online)

    Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

Our objectives were (1) to determine if studying hospital complication rates after coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery provides information not available when only mortality is studied, and (2) to reexplore the utility of ICD-9-CM administrative data for CABG outcomes assessment. Using data from Massachusetts, we identified CABG cohorts from 1990 and 1992 to respectively develop and validate multivariate risk adjustment models predicting in-hospital mortality and complications. The resulting models had good discrimination and calibration. In 1992, adjusted hospital complication rates ranged widely from 13.0% to 57.6%, while mortality rates ranged from 1.4% to 6.1 %. Hospitals with high complication rates tended to have high mortality (r = 0.74, P = 0.006), but 2 of the 12 hospitals studied ranked quite differently when judged by complications rather than mortality. We conclude that (1) complications after CABG occur frequently and may provide information about hospital quality beyond that obtained from hospital mortality rates, and that (2) administrative data continue to be a promising resource for outcomes research.

Keywords

Coronary Bypass - Complications - Mortality - ICD-9-CM - Risk Adjustment

1 W. Ghali is now affiliated with the University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada; R. Hall is now affiliated with the University of Toronto, Toronto, ONT, Canada, and A. Rosen is now affiliated with the center for Health Quality, Outcomes, and Economic Research, Bedford MA, USA.


2 This study was supported by the Walnut Medical Charitable Trust, Massachusetts Health Data Consortium and Alberta Heritage Foundation for Medical Research (Population Health Investigator Grant – W. A. Ghali).


 

  • REFERENCES

  • 1 Health Care Financing Special Report. Rehospitalization by Geographic Areas for Aged Medicare Beneficiaries: Selected Procedures, 1986. Volume 3. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services; June 1990. 1-17 379-419.
    Google Scholar
  • 2 Medicare Hospital Mortality Information, 1986. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services; 1987
    Google Scholar
  • 3 Paiement B, Pelletier C, Dyrda I. et al. A simple classification of the risk in cardiac surgery. Can Anaesth Soc J 1983; 30 (1) 61-8.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Parsonnet V, Dean D, Bernstein AD. A method of uniform stratification of risk for evaluating the results of surgery in acquired adult heart disease. Circulation 1989; 79 (suppl I) 3-12.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Hartz AJ, Kuhn EM, Pryor DB. et al. Mortality after coronary angioplasty and coronary artery bypass surgery (the national Medicare experience). Am J Cardiol 1992; 70: 179-85.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Williams SV, Nash DB, Goldfarb N. Differences in mortality from coronary artery bypass graft surgery at five teaching hospitals. JAMA 1991; 266: 810-5.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Showstack JA, Rosenfeld KE, Garnick DW, Luft HS, Schaffarzick RW, Fowles J. Association of volume with outcome of coronary artery bypass graft surgery: Scheduled vs. nonscheduled operations. JAMA 1987; 257: 785-9.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Tu JV, Mazer CD, Levinton C, Armstrong PW, Naylor CD. A predictive index for length of stay in the intensive care unit following cardiac surgery. Can Med Assoc J 1994; 151 (2) 177-85.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Rosen AK, Geraci JM, Ash AS, McNiff KJ, Moskowitz MA. Postoperative adverse events of common surgical procedures in the Medicare population. Med Care 1992; 30: 753-65.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Geraci JM, Rosen AK, Ash AS, McNiff KJ, Moskowitz MA. Predicting the occurrence of adverse events after coronary artery bypass surgery. Ann Intern Med 1993; 118: 18-24.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Hartz AJ, Kuhn EM. Comparing hospitals that perform coronary artery bypass surgery: The effect of outcome measures and data sources. Am J Public Health 1994; 84: 1609-14.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Silber JH, Rosenbaum PR, Schwartz JS, Ross RN, Williams SV. Evaluation of the complication rate as a measure of quality of care in coronary artery bypass graft surgery. JAMA 1995; 274: 317-23.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Hannan EL, Kilburn H, O'Konnell JF, Lukacik G, Shields EP. Adult open heart surgery in New York State: An analysis of risk factors and hospital mortality rates. JAMA 1990; 264: 2768-74.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Hannan EL, Kilburn H, Racz M, Shields E, Chassin MR. Improving the outcomes of coronary artery bypass surgery in New York State. JAMA 1994; 271: 761-6.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Hannan EL, O'Donnel JF, Kilburn JF, Bernard HR, Yazici A. Investigation of the relationship between volume and mortality for surgical procedures performed in New York State hospitals. JAMA 1989; 262: 503-10.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 O'Connor GT, Plume SK, Olmstead EM. et al. (for the Northern New England Cardiovascular Disease Study Group) Multivariate prediction of in-hospital mortality associated with coronary artery bypass graft surgery. Circulation 1992; 85: 2110-8.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 O'Connor GT, Plume SK, Olmstead EM. et al. (for the Northern New England Cardiovascular Disease Study Group) A regional prospective study of in-hospital mortality associated with coronary artery bypass grafting. JAMA 1991; 266: 803-9.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Iezzoni LI. Using administrative diagnostic data to assess the quality of hospital care: Pitfalls and potential of ICD-9-CM. Int J Technol Assess in Health Care 1990; 6: 272-81.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Hannan EL, Kilburn H, Lindsey ML, Lewis R. Clinical versus administrative databases for CABG surgery: Does it matter?. Med Care 1992; 30: 892-907.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Romano PS, Roos LL, Luft HS, Jollis JG, Doliszny K. for the Ischemic Heart Disease Patient Outcomes Research Team. A comparison of administrative versus clinical data: Coronary artery bypass surgery as an example. J Clin Epidemiol 1994; 47: 249-60.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Jollis JG, Ancukiewicz M, DeLong Er, Pryor DB. Discordance of databases designed for claims payment versus clinical information systems: Implications for outcomes research. Ann Intern Med 1993; 119 (8) 844-50.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Smith DW, Pine M, Bailey RC, Jones B, Brewster A, Krakauer H. Using clinical variables to estimate the risk of patient mortality. Med Care 1991; 29: 1108-29.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Densen PM, Fielding JE, Getson J, Stone E. The collection of data on hospital patients – The Massachusetts Health Data Consortium approach. N Engl J Med 1980; 302: 171-3.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Diagnosis Related Groups. version 10.0, definitions manual 3M Health Information Systems. 1992
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 International Classification of Diseases, ninth revision, clinical modification. Washington, DC: Public Health Service, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services; 1988
    Google Scholar
  • 26 Deyo RA, Cherkin DC, Ciol MA. Adapting a clinical comorbidity index for use with ICD-9-CM administrative databases. J Clin Epidemiol 1992; 45: 613-9.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Charlson ME, Pompei P, Ales KL, MacKenzie CR. A new method of classifying prognostic comorbidity in longitudinal studies: Development and validation. J Chron Dis 1987; 40: 373-83.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 28 Ghali WA, Hall RE, Rosen AK, Ash AS, Moskowitz MA. Searching for an improved clinical comorbidity index for use with ICD-9-CM administrative data. J Clin Epidemiol 1996; 49: 273-8.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 29 Jencks SF, Williams DK, Kay TL. Assessing hospital-associated deaths from discharge data: The role of length of stay and comorbidities. JAMA 1988; 260: 2240-6.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 30 Rothman KJ. Modern Epidemiology. Boston/Toronto: Little, Brown and Company; 1986: 311-26.
    Google Scholar
  • 31 Ash AS, Shwartz M. Evaluating the performance of risk-adjustment methods: Dichotomous measures. In: Iezzoni LI. editor Risk Adjustment for Measuring Health Care Outcomes. Ann Arbor, Michigan: Health Administration Press; 1994: 31346.
    Google Scholar
  • 32 Dubois RW, Rogers WH, Moxley JH, Draper D, Brook RH. Hospital inpatient mortality: Is it a predictor of quality?. N Engl J Med 1987; 317: 1674-80.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 33 Shapiro MF, Park RE, Keesey J, Brook RH. The effect of alternative case-mix adjustments on mortality differences between municipal and voluntary hospitals in New York City. Health Serv Res 1994; 29 (1) 95-112.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 34 Green J, Wintfeld N, Sharkey P, Passman LJ. The importance of severity of illness in assessing hospital mortality. JAMA 1990; 263: 241-6.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 35 Green J, Wintfeld N. Report cards on cardiac surgeons: Assessing New York State's approach. N Engl J Med 1995; 332: 1229-32.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 36 Leape LL, Hilborne LH, Kahan JP, Stason WB, Park RE, Kamberg CJ, Brook RH. Coronary artery bypass graft: A literature review and ratings of appropriateness and necessity. Santa Monica: RAND; 1991
    Google Scholar
  • 37 Kasper JF, Plume SK, O'Connor GT. A methodology for QI in the coronary artery bypass grafting procedure involving comparative process analysis. QRB 1992; 129-33.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 38 Brook RH. Health care reform is on the way: Do we want to compete on quality?. Ann Intern Med 1994; 120: 84-5.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 39 Topol EJ, Califf RM. Scorecard cardiovascular medicine: Its impact and future directions. Ann Intern Med 1994; 120: 65-70.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 40 Jencks SF, Wilensky GR. The health care quality improvement initiative: A new approach to quality assurance in Medicare. JAMA 1992; 268: 900-3.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 41 Romano PS, Mark DH. Bias in the coding of hospital discharge data and its implications for quality assessment. Med Care 1994; 32: 81-90.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar