Textbook process as a composite quality indicator for in-hospital hip fracture care

被引:5
作者
Voeten, Stijn C. [1 ,2 ]
Wouters, Michel W. J. M. [2 ,3 ]
Wurdemann, Franka S. [1 ,2 ]
Krijnen, Pieta [1 ]
Schipper, Inger B. [1 ]
Hegeman, J. H. [4 ]
机构
[1] Leiden Univ, Med Ctr, Dept Trauma Surg, Albinesdreef 2, NL-2333 ZA Leiden, Netherlands
[2] Dutch Inst Clin Auditing, Leiden, Netherlands
[3] Antoni van Leeuwenhoek Hosp, Netherlands Canc Inst, Dept Surg, Amsterdam, Netherlands
[4] Ziekenhuisgrp Twente, Dept Trauma Surg, Almelo Hengelo, Netherlands
关键词
Quality of care; Audit; Hip fracture; Textbook process; COLORECTAL-CANCER; OF-CARE; ELDERLY-PATIENTS; OUTCOMES; SURGERY; INFORMATION;
D O I
10.1007/s11657-021-00909-6
中图分类号
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
A Summary Individual process indicators often do not enable the benchmarking of hospitals and often lack an association with outcomes of care. The composite hip fracture process indicator, textbook process, might be a tool to detect hospital variation and is associated with better outcomes during hospital stay. Purpose The aim of this study was to determine hospital variation in quality of hip fracture care using a composite process indicator (textbook process) and to evaluate at patient level whether fulfilment of the textbook process indicator was associated with better outcomes during hospital stay. Methods Hip fracture patients aged 70 and older operated in five hospitals between 1 January 2018 and 31 December 2018 were included. Textbook process for hip fracture care was defined as follows: (1) assessment of malnutrition (2) surgery within 24 h, (3) orthogeriatric management during admission and (4) operation by an orthopaedic trauma certified surgeon. Hospital variation analysis was done by computing an observed/expected ratio (O/E ratio) for textbook process at hospital level. The expected ratios were derived from a multivariable logistic regression analysis including all relevant case-mix variables. The association between textbook process compliance and in-hospital complications and prolonged hospital stay was determined at patient level in a multivariable logistic regression model, with correction for patient, treatment and hospital characteristics. In-hospital complications were anaemia, delirium, pneumonia, urinary tract infection, in-hospital fall, heart failure, renal insufficiency, pulmonary embolism, wound infection and pressure ulcer. Results Of the 1371 included patients, 753 (55%) received care according to textbook process. At hospital level, the textbook compliance rates ranged from 38 to 76%. At patient level, textbook process compliance was significantly associated with fewer complications (38% versus 46%) (OR 0.66, 95% CI 0.52-0.84), but not with hospital stay (median length of hospital stay was 5 days in both groups) (OR 1.01, 95% CI 0.78-1.30). Conclusion The textbook process indicator for hip fracture care might be a tool to detect hospital variation. At patient level, this quality indicator is associated with fewer complications during hospital stay.
引用
收藏
页数:11
相关论文
共 34 条
[1]   Identifying and quantifying variation between healthcare organisations and geographical regions: using mixed-effects models [J].
Abel, Gary ;
Elliott, Marc N. .
BMJ QUALITY & SAFETY, 2019, 28 (12) :1032-1038
[2]  
[Anonymous], 2023, Hip fracture: management: Clinical guideline CG124
[3]  
[Anonymous], 2018, DATABESTANDEN BASISS
[4]  
[Anonymous], 2018, BASISSET MEDISCH SPE
[5]   Assessment of Nutrition and Supplementation in Patients With Hip Fractures [J].
Arkley, James ;
Dixon, Jan ;
Wilson, Faye ;
Charlton, Karl ;
Ollivere, Benjamin John ;
Eardley, William .
GERIATRIC ORTHOPAEDIC SURGERY & REHABILITATION, 2019, 10
[6]   Pneumonectomy for Lung Cancer Treatment in The Netherlands: Between-Hospital Variation and Outcomes [J].
Beck, Naomi ;
van Brakel, Thomas J. ;
Smit, Hans J. M. ;
van Klaveren, David ;
Wouters, Michel W. J. M. ;
Schreurs, Wilhelmina H. .
WORLD JOURNAL OF SURGERY, 2020, 44 (01) :285-294
[7]   Textbook outcome as a composite measure in oesophagogastric cancer surgery [J].
Busweiler, L. A. D. ;
Schouwenburg, M. G. ;
Henegouwen, M. I. van Berge ;
Kolfschoten, N. E. ;
de Jong, P. C. ;
Rozema, T. ;
Wijnhoven, B. P. L. ;
van Hillegersberg, R. ;
Wouters, M. W. J. M. ;
van Sandick, J. W. .
BRITISH JOURNAL OF SURGERY, 2017, 104 (06) :742-750
[8]   Secondary Fracture Prevention: Consensus Clinical Recommendations from a Multistakeholder Coalition [J].
Conley, Robert B. ;
Adib, Gemma ;
Adler, Robert A. ;
Akesson, Kristina E. ;
Alexander, Ivy M. ;
Amenta, Kelly C. ;
Blank, Robert D. ;
Brox, William Timothy ;
Carmody, Emily E. ;
Chapman-Novakofski, Karen ;
Clarke, Bart L. ;
Cody, Kathleen M. ;
Cooper, Cyrus ;
Crandall, Carolyn J. ;
Dirschl, Douglas R. ;
Eagen, Thomas J. ;
Elderkin, Ann L. ;
Fujita, Masaki ;
Greenspan, Susan L. ;
Halbout, Philippe ;
Hochberg, Marc C. ;
Javaid, Muhammad ;
Jeray, Kyle J. ;
Kearns, Ann E. ;
King, Toby ;
Koinis, Thomas F. ;
Koontz, Jennifer Scott ;
Kuzma, Martin ;
Lindsey, Carleen ;
Lorentzon, Mattias ;
Lyritis, George P. ;
Michaud, Laura Boehnke ;
Miciano, Armando ;
Morin, Suzanne N. ;
Mujahid, Nadia ;
Napoli, Nicola ;
Olenginski, Thomas P. ;
Puzas, J. Edward ;
Rizou, Stavroula ;
Rosen, Clifford J. ;
Saag, Kenneth ;
Thompson, Elizabeth ;
Tosi, Laura L. ;
Tracer, Howard ;
Khosla, Sundeep ;
Kiel, Douglas P. .
JOURNAL OF ORTHOPAEDIC TRAUMA, 2020, 34 (04) :E125-E141
[9]   Choosing a Hospital for Surgery: The Importance of Information on Quality of Care [J].
Dijs-Elsinga, Joyce ;
Otten, Wilma ;
Versluijs, Martine M. ;
Smeets, Harm J. ;
Kievit, Job ;
Vree, Robbert ;
van der Made, Wendeline J. ;
Marang-van de Mheen, Perla J. .
MEDICAL DECISION MAKING, 2010, 30 (05) :544-555
[10]   What Makes a "Good" Quality Indicator? INVITED CRITIQUE [J].
Dimick, Justin B. .
ARCHIVES OF SURGERY, 2010, 145 (03) :295-295