Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To describe a new quality assessment method used to classify the preventability of hospitalization in terms of patient, clinician, or system factors.
DESIGN: The instrument was developed in two phases. Phase 1 was a prospective comparison of admitting residents’ and their attending physicians’ classifications of the perceived preventability of consecutive admissions to one Veterans Affairs Medical Center (VAMC) excluding admissions to the intensive care unit (ICU). In phase 2, a panel of 10 physicians rated 811 abstracted records of readmissions from nine VAMCs.
SETTING: Nine VAMCs across the United States with varying degrees of university hospital affiliation.
PATIENTS: Phase 1, 156 patients admitted to the general medicine service at the Durham VAMC. Phase 2, 514 patients accounting for 811 readmissions within 6 months of a general medicine service discharge at nine VAMCs.
MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Physicians used a checklist to record the reason for hospitalization, the preventability of the hospitalization, and, if preventable, a reason defining preventability, which was classified in terms of system, clinician, and patient factors. In phase 2, two physician panelists assessed preventability for each chart. When two panelists disagreed on the preventability of hospitalization, a third panelist, blind to the original assessments, rated the chart. In phase 1, residents and attending physicians rated 33% and 34% of admissions as preventable (κ=0.41), respectively. In phase 2, 277 (34%) of 811 readmissions were deemed preventable. Intraobserver accuracy for the assessment of preventability was 96% (κ=0.89). Interobserver accuracy was 73% (κ=0.43). Hospital system factors accounted for 37% of preventable readmissions, clinician factors for 38%, and patient factors for 21%. The nine hospitals differed markedly in their profile of reasons for preventable readmissions (p=.005).
CONCLUSIONS: Using a new method of determining the preventability of hospitalizations, we identified several factors that might avert hospitalizations. Focusing efforts to identify preventable hospitalizations may yield better methods for managing patients’ total health care needs; however, the content of those efforts will vary by institution.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Iglehart JK. The American health care system managed care. N Engl J Med. 1992;327:742–7.
Relman AS. Controlling costs by “managed competition”—would it work? N Engl J Med. 1993;328:133–5.
Fisher ES, Wennberg JE, Stukel TA, Sharp SM. Hospital readmission rates for cohorts of Medicare beneficiaries in Boston and New Haven. N Engl J Med. 1994;331:989–95.
Roos NP, Flowerdew G, Wajda A, Tate RB. Variations in physician’s hospitalization practices: a population-based study in Manitoba, Canada. Am J Public Health. 1986;76:45–51.
Roos NP. Hospitalization style of physicians in Manitoba: the disturbing lack of logic in medical practice. Health Serv Res. 1992;27:361–84.
Payne SMC. Identifying and managing inappropriate hospital utilization: a policy synthesis. Health Serv Res. 1987;22:712–69.
Berwick DM. Eleven worthy aims for clinical leadership of health system reform. JAMA. 1994;272:797–802.
Panzer RJ. Hospital readmissions and quality of care. Am J Med. 1991;90:665–6.
Gertman PM, Restuccia JD. The appropriateness evaluation protocol: a technique for assessing unnecessary days of hospital care. Med Care. 1981;19:855–70.
InterQual, Inc. The ISD—A Review System with Adult Criteria. Chicago, Ill: InterQual, Inc.; 1987.
Siu AL, Sonnenberg FA, Manning WG, et al. Inappropriate use of hospitals in a randomized trial of health insurance plans. N Engl J Med. 1986;315:1259–66.
Ludke RL, MacDowell NM, Booth BM, Hunter SA. Appropriateness of admissions and discharges among readmitted patients. Health Serv Res. 1990;25:501–25.
Winickoff RN, Restuccia JD, Fincke BG. Concurrent application of the appropriateness evaluation protocol to acute admissions in Department of Veterans Affairs Medical Centers. Med Care. 1991;29:AS64–76.
Weinberger M, Oddone EZ, Hendersen W, et al. Can increased access to primary care prevent hospital readmissions? N Engl J Med. 1996;334:1441–7.
Siegel S. Nonparametric Statistics for the Behavioral Sciences. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill; 1956:196.
Fleiss JL. Statistical Methods for Rates and Proportions. 2nd ed. New York, NY: John Wiley and Sons; 1981:212.
Cochran WG. Sampling Techniques. 3rd ed. New York, NY: John Wiley and Sons; 1977:64–6.
Oddone E, Weinberger M, Hurder A, Henderson W, Simel D. Measuring activities in clinical trials using random work sampling: implications for cost-effectiveness analysis and measurement of the intervention. J Clin Epidemiol. 1995;48:1011–8.
Koran LM. The reliability of clinical methods, data and judgements. N Engl J Med. 1975;293:695–701.
Ludke RL, Wakefield DS, Booth BM, Kern DC, Burmeister LF. Nonacute utilization of Department of Veteran Affairs inpatient services. Med Care. 1991;29:AS29–39.
Bigby J, Dunn J, Goldman L, et al. Assessing the preventability of emergency hospital admissions. Am J Med. 1987;83:1031–6.
Frankl SE, Breeling JL, Goldman L. Preventability of emergent hospital readmission. Am J Med. 1991;90:667–74.
Weissman JS, Gatsonis C, Epstein AM. Rates of avoidable hospitalization by insurance status in Massachusetts and Maryland. JAMA. 1992;268:2388–94.
Bindman AB, Grumbach K, Osmond D, et al. Preventable hospitalizations and access to care. JAMA. 1995;274:305–11.
Hayward RA, McMahon LF Jr, Bernard AM. Evaluating the care of general medicine inpatients: how good is implicit review? Ann Intern Med. 1993;118:550–6.
MacKenzie EJ, Steinwachs DM, Bone LR, Floccare DJ, Ramzy AI. Inter-rater reliability of preventable death judgements. J Trauma. 1992;33:292–302.
Goldman RL. The reliability of peer assessments of quality of care. JAMA. 1992;267:958–60.
Dubois RW, Brook RH. Preventable deaths: who, how often, and why? Ann Intern Med. 1988;109:582–9.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Consortia
Additional information
Supported by a grant from the Department of Veterans Affairs Health Services Research and Development Program, Veterans Affairs Cooperative Studies in Health Services No. 8, and the Veterans Affairs Health Services Career Development Program. Dr. Oddone is also supported by the Robert Wood Johnson Generalist Physician Faculty Scholars Program.
The following investigators and institutions participated in the Health Services Trial on Primary Care and Readmissions: Data Monitoring Board,Thomas Meyer (chairman), Mary Foulkes, Mark Hlatky, Kristin Nichol; Executive Committee,Terry Adams, Carol Ashton, John Demakis, John Feussner, James Gibbs, William Henderson, Denise Hines, Charles Mengel; Brooklyn, NY,Rita Varano, Estelita Anteola; Cincinnati, Ohio,James Schultz, Virginia Hedger; Columbia, SC, Fodie Calkins, Grady Allen; Durham, NC,Marjorie Foy, Aileen Ward, Pamela Landsman; Fresno, Calif.,Kimberli Cox, Paula Hensley; Indianapolis, Ind.,Gayle Redmon, Terry Adams; Leavenworth, Kan.,Marie Cook, Lynn Carrel; Loma Linda, Calif.,Nalda Gordon, Elizabeth Wise; Philadelphia, Pa.,Joan Havey, Alice Cooney.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Oddone, E.Z., Weinberger, M., Horner, M. et al. Classifying general medicine readmissions. J Gen Intern Med 11, 597–607 (1996). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02599027
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02599027