Talk to the Veterans Crisis Line now
U.S. flag
An official website of the United States government

Health Services Research & Development

Go to the ORD website
Go to the QUERI website

HSR&D Citation Abstract

Search | Search by Center | Search by Source | Keywords in Title

Do pneumonia readmissions flagged as potentially preventable by the 3M PPR software have more process of care problems? A cross-sectional observational study.

Borzecki AM, Chen Q, Restuccia J, Mull HJ, Shwartz M, Gupta K, Hanchate A, Strymish J, Rosen A. Do pneumonia readmissions flagged as potentially preventable by the 3M PPR software have more process of care problems? A cross-sectional observational study. BMJ quality & safety. 2015 Dec 1; 24(12):753-63.

Dimensions for VA is a web-based tool available to VA staff that enables detailed searches of published research and research projects.

If you have VA-Intranet access, click here for more information vaww.hsrd.research.va.gov/dimensions/

VA staff not currently on the VA network can access Dimensions by registering for an account using their VA email address.
   Search Dimensions for VA for this citation
* Don't have VA-internal network access or a VA email address? Try searching the free-to-the-public version of Dimensions



Abstract:

BACKGROUND: In the USA, administrative data-based readmission rates such as the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services' all-cause readmission measures are used for public reporting and hospital payment penalties. To improve this measure and identify better quality improvement targets, 3M developed the Potentially Preventable Readmissions (PPRs) measure. It matches clinically related index admission and readmission diagnoses that may indicate readmissions resulting from admission- or post-discharge-related quality problems. OBJECTIVE: To examine whether PPR software-flagged pneumonia readmissions are associated with poorer quality of care. METHODS: Using a retrospective observational study design and Veterans Health Administration (VA) data, we identified pneumonia discharges associated with 30-day readmissions, and then flagged cases as PPR-yes or PPR-no using the PPR software. To assess quality of care, we abstracted electronic medical records of 100 random readmissions using a tool containing explicit care processes organised into admission work-up, in-hospital evaluation/treatment, discharge readiness and post-discharge period. We derived quality scores, scaled to a maximum of 25 per section (maximum total score = 100) and compared cases by total and section-specific mean scores using t tests and effect size (ES) to characterise the clinical significance of findings. RESULTS: Our abstraction sample was selected from 11,278 pneumonia readmissions (readmission rate = 16.5%) during 1 October 2005-30 September 2010; 77% were flagged as PPR-yes. Contrary to expectations, total and section mean quality scores were slightly higher, although non-significantly, among PPR-yes (N = 77) versus PPR-no (N = 23) cases (respective total scores, 71.2 8.7 vs 65.8 11.5, p = 0.14); differences demonstrated ES > 0.30 overall and for admission work-up and post-discharge period sections. CONCLUSIONS: Among VA pneumonia readmissions, PPR categorisation did not produce the expected quality of care findings. Either PPR-yes cases are not more preventable, or preventability assessment requires other data collection methods to capture poorly documented processes (eg, direct observation).





Questions about the HSR&D website? Email the Web Team.

Any health information on this website is strictly for informational purposes and is not intended as medical advice. It should not be used to diagnose or treat any condition.