This Article Full Text (PDF) All Versions of this Article: 1062860609339936v1 24/5/395    most recent References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via Web of Science (1) Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Davenport, D. L. Articles by Conigliaro, J. PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Davenport, D. L. Articles by Conigliaro, J. Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

Assessing Surgical Quality Using Administrative and Clinical Data Sets: A Direct Comparison of the University HealthSystem Consortium Clinical Database and the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program Data Set

Department of Surgery, University of Kentucky College of Medicine, Lexington, Kentucky, daniel.davenport{at}uky.edu

Clyde W. Holsapple, PhD

Decision Science and Information Systems Area, University of Kentucky School of Management, Lexington, Kentucky

Joseph Conigliaro, MD, MPH

Center for Enterprise Quality and Safety, University of Kentucky Chandler Medical Center, Lexington, Kentucky

The use of "clinical" versus "administrative" data sets for health care quality assessment continues to be debated. This study directly compares the University HealthSystem Consortium Clinical Database (UHC CDB) and the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) in terms of their assessment of complications and death for 26 322 surgery patients using analyses of variance, correlation, and multivariable logistic regression. The NSQIP had more variables with significant correlation with outcomes. The NSQIP was better at predicting death (c-index 0.94 vs 0.90, P < .05) and complications (c-index 0.78 vs 0.76, P = .07), especially for higher risk patients. The UHC CDB missed and misclassified several major complications. The data sets are similar in their explanatory power relative to outcomes, but the clinical data set is better, particularly at identifying higher risk patients and specific complications. It should prove more useful for initiating and monitoring clinical process improvements because of more clinically relevant variables. (Am J Med Qual 2009;24:395-402)

Key Words: National Surgical Quality Improvement Program • University HealthSystem Consortium • surgical quality assessment • contextual data quality • surgical morbidity and mortality

This version was published on September 1, 2009

American Journal of Medical Quality, Vol. 24, No. 5, 395-402 (2009)
DOI: 10.1177/1062860609339936


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?