Background
Post-operative pneumonia is the most prevalent of all hospital-acquired infections following isolated coronary artery bypass grafting (CAB). Accurate prediction of a patient’s risk of this morbid complication is hindered by its low relative incidence. In an effort to support clinical decision-making and quality improvement, we developed a pre-operative prediction model for post-operative pneumonia following CAB.
Methods
We undertook an observational study of 16,084 patients undergoing CAB between Q3 2011 – Q2 2014 across 33 institutions participating in the Michigan Society of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgeons – Quality Collaborative. Variables related to patient demographics, medical history, admission status, comorbid disease, cardiac anatomy and the institution performing the procedure were investigated. Logistic regression via forwards stepwise selection (p < 0.05 threshold) was utilized to develop a risk prediction model for estimating the occurrence of pneumonia. Traditional methods were employed to assess the model’s performance.
Results
Post-operative pneumonia occurred in 3.30% of patients. Multivariable analysis identified 17 pre-operative factors, including: demographics, laboratory values, comorbid disease, pulmonary and cardiac function, and operative status. The final model significantly predicted the occurrence of pneumonia, and performed well (C-statistic: 0.74). These findings were confirmed via sensitivity analyses by center and clinically important sub-groups.
Conclusions
We identified 17 readily obtainable pre-operative variables associated with post-operative pneumonia. This model may be used to provide individualized risk estimation and to identify opportunities to reduce a patient’s pre-operative risk of pneumonia through pre-habilitation.
Background
In the setting of a statewide quality collaborative approach to the review of cardiac surgical mortalities in intensive care units (ICUs), variations in complication-related outcomes became apparent. Utilizing “failure to rescue” methodology, (FTR; the probability of death after a complication), we compared FTR rates after adult cardiac surgery in low, medium, and high mortality centers from a voluntary, 33-center quality collaborative.
Methods
We identified 45,904 patients with a Society of Thoracic Surgeons predicted risk of mortality who underwent cardiac surgery between 2006 and 2010. The 33 centers were ranked according to observed-to-expected (O/E) ratios for mortality and were categorized into 3 equal groups. We then compared rates of complications and FTR.
Results
Overall unadjusted mortality was 2.6%, ranging from 1.5% in the low-mortality group to 3.6% in the high group. The rate of 17 complications ranged from 19.1% in the low group to 22.9% in the high group while FTR rates were 6.6% in the low group, 10.4% in the medium group, and 13.5% in the high group (p<0.001). The FTR rate was significantly better in the low mortality group for the majority of complications (11 of 17) with the most significant findings for cardiac arrest, dialysis, prolonged ventilation, and pneumonia.
Conclusion
Low mortality hospitals have superior ability to rescue patients from complications after cardiac surgery procedures. Outcomes review incorporating a collaborative multi-hospital approach can provide an ideal opportunity to review processes that anticipate and manage complications in the ICU and help recognize and share “differentiators” in care.
Wide variation exists in 90-day CABG episode payments for Medicare and private payer patients in Michigan. Hospitals and clinicians entering bundled payment programs for CABG should work to understand local sources of variation, with a focus on patients with multiple readmissions, inpatient evaluation and management services, and postdischarge outpatient rehabilitation care.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.