How well does diagnosis-based risk-adjustment work for comparing ambulatory clinical outcomes?

Askar S. Chukmaitov, David W. Harless, Nir Menachemi, Charles Saunders, Robert G. Brooks

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

6 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

This paper examines the empirical consistency of the Diagnosis Cost Groups/Hierarchical Condition Categories (DCG/HCC) risk-adjustment method for comparing 7-day mortality between hospital-based outpatient departments (HOPDs) and freestanding ambulatory surgery centers (ASCs). We used patient level data for the three most common outpatient procedures provided during the 1997-2004 period in Florida. We estimated base-line logistic regression models without any diagnosis-based risk adjustment and compared them to logistic regression models with the DCG/HCC risk-adjustment, and to conditional logit models with a matched cohort risk-adjustment approach. We also evaluated models that adjusted for primary diagnoses only, and then for all available diagnoses, to assess how the frequently absent secondary diagnoses fields in ambulatory surgical data affect risk-adjustment. We found that risk-adjustment using both diagnosis-based methods resulted in similar 7-day mortality estimates for HOPD patients in comparison with ASC patients in two out of three procedures. We conclude that the DCG/HCC risk-adjustment method is relatively consistent and stable, and recommend this risk-adjustment method for health policy research and practice with ambulatory surgery data. We also recommend using risk-adjustment with all available diagnoses.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)420-433
Number of pages14
JournalHealth Care Management Science
Volume12
Issue number4
DOIs
StatePublished - Nov 1 2009
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Risk Adjustment
Logistic Models
Ambulatory Surgical Procedures
Outpatients
Hospital Mortality
Costs and Cost Analysis
Health Policy

Keywords

  • Administrative data
  • Ambulatory
  • Diagnosis Cost Groups/Hierarchical Condition Categories (DCG/HCC)
  • Mortality
  • Risk-adjustment

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Medicine (miscellaneous)
  • Health Professions(all)

Cite this

How well does diagnosis-based risk-adjustment work for comparing ambulatory clinical outcomes? / Chukmaitov, Askar S.; Harless, David W.; Menachemi, Nir; Saunders, Charles; Brooks, Robert G.

In: Health Care Management Science, Vol. 12, No. 4, 01.11.2009, p. 420-433.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Chukmaitov, Askar S. ; Harless, David W. ; Menachemi, Nir ; Saunders, Charles ; Brooks, Robert G. / How well does diagnosis-based risk-adjustment work for comparing ambulatory clinical outcomes?. In: Health Care Management Science. 2009 ; Vol. 12, No. 4. pp. 420-433.
@article{9d9990e488384903b17566dea72ee243,
title = "How well does diagnosis-based risk-adjustment work for comparing ambulatory clinical outcomes?",
abstract = "This paper examines the empirical consistency of the Diagnosis Cost Groups/Hierarchical Condition Categories (DCG/HCC) risk-adjustment method for comparing 7-day mortality between hospital-based outpatient departments (HOPDs) and freestanding ambulatory surgery centers (ASCs). We used patient level data for the three most common outpatient procedures provided during the 1997-2004 period in Florida. We estimated base-line logistic regression models without any diagnosis-based risk adjustment and compared them to logistic regression models with the DCG/HCC risk-adjustment, and to conditional logit models with a matched cohort risk-adjustment approach. We also evaluated models that adjusted for primary diagnoses only, and then for all available diagnoses, to assess how the frequently absent secondary diagnoses fields in ambulatory surgical data affect risk-adjustment. We found that risk-adjustment using both diagnosis-based methods resulted in similar 7-day mortality estimates for HOPD patients in comparison with ASC patients in two out of three procedures. We conclude that the DCG/HCC risk-adjustment method is relatively consistent and stable, and recommend this risk-adjustment method for health policy research and practice with ambulatory surgery data. We also recommend using risk-adjustment with all available diagnoses.",
keywords = "Administrative data, Ambulatory, Diagnosis Cost Groups/Hierarchical Condition Categories (DCG/HCC), Mortality, Risk-adjustment",
author = "Chukmaitov, {Askar S.} and Harless, {David W.} and Nir Menachemi and Charles Saunders and Brooks, {Robert G.}",
year = "2009",
month = "11",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1007/s10729-009-9101-3",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "12",
pages = "420--433",
journal = "Health Care Management Science",
issn = "1386-9620",
publisher = "Kluwer Academic Publishers",
number = "4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - How well does diagnosis-based risk-adjustment work for comparing ambulatory clinical outcomes?

AU - Chukmaitov, Askar S.

AU - Harless, David W.

AU - Menachemi, Nir

AU - Saunders, Charles

AU - Brooks, Robert G.

PY - 2009/11/1

Y1 - 2009/11/1

N2 - This paper examines the empirical consistency of the Diagnosis Cost Groups/Hierarchical Condition Categories (DCG/HCC) risk-adjustment method for comparing 7-day mortality between hospital-based outpatient departments (HOPDs) and freestanding ambulatory surgery centers (ASCs). We used patient level data for the three most common outpatient procedures provided during the 1997-2004 period in Florida. We estimated base-line logistic regression models without any diagnosis-based risk adjustment and compared them to logistic regression models with the DCG/HCC risk-adjustment, and to conditional logit models with a matched cohort risk-adjustment approach. We also evaluated models that adjusted for primary diagnoses only, and then for all available diagnoses, to assess how the frequently absent secondary diagnoses fields in ambulatory surgical data affect risk-adjustment. We found that risk-adjustment using both diagnosis-based methods resulted in similar 7-day mortality estimates for HOPD patients in comparison with ASC patients in two out of three procedures. We conclude that the DCG/HCC risk-adjustment method is relatively consistent and stable, and recommend this risk-adjustment method for health policy research and practice with ambulatory surgery data. We also recommend using risk-adjustment with all available diagnoses.

AB - This paper examines the empirical consistency of the Diagnosis Cost Groups/Hierarchical Condition Categories (DCG/HCC) risk-adjustment method for comparing 7-day mortality between hospital-based outpatient departments (HOPDs) and freestanding ambulatory surgery centers (ASCs). We used patient level data for the three most common outpatient procedures provided during the 1997-2004 period in Florida. We estimated base-line logistic regression models without any diagnosis-based risk adjustment and compared them to logistic regression models with the DCG/HCC risk-adjustment, and to conditional logit models with a matched cohort risk-adjustment approach. We also evaluated models that adjusted for primary diagnoses only, and then for all available diagnoses, to assess how the frequently absent secondary diagnoses fields in ambulatory surgical data affect risk-adjustment. We found that risk-adjustment using both diagnosis-based methods resulted in similar 7-day mortality estimates for HOPD patients in comparison with ASC patients in two out of three procedures. We conclude that the DCG/HCC risk-adjustment method is relatively consistent and stable, and recommend this risk-adjustment method for health policy research and practice with ambulatory surgery data. We also recommend using risk-adjustment with all available diagnoses.

KW - Administrative data

KW - Ambulatory

KW - Diagnosis Cost Groups/Hierarchical Condition Categories (DCG/HCC)

KW - Mortality

KW - Risk-adjustment

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=75749095257&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=75749095257&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1007/s10729-009-9101-3

DO - 10.1007/s10729-009-9101-3

M3 - Article

VL - 12

SP - 420

EP - 433

JO - Health Care Management Science

JF - Health Care Management Science

SN - 1386-9620

IS - 4

ER -