National Healthcare Quality and Disparities Report
Latest available findings on quality of and access to health care
Data
- Data Infographics
- Data Visualizations
- Data Tools
- Data Innovations
- All-Payer Claims Database
- Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project (HCUP)
- Medical Expenditure Panel Survey (MEPS)
- AHRQ Quality Indicator Tools for Data Analytics
- State Snapshots
- United States Health Information Knowledgebase (USHIK)
- Data Sources Available from AHRQ
Search All Research Studies
AHRQ Research Studies Date
AHRQ Research Studies
Sign up: AHRQ Research Studies Email updates
Research Studies is a compilation of published research articles funded by AHRQ or authored by AHRQ researchers.
Results
1 to 4 of 4 Research Studies DisplayedAuerbach AD, Lee TM, Hubbard CC
Diagnostic errors in hospitalized adults who died or were transferred to intensive care.
The objective of this retrospective cohort study was to determine the prevalence, underlying causes, and harms of diagnostic errors in hospitalized adults who were transferred to an intensive care unit or who died. Data was taken from 29 academic medical centers in the U.S. in a random sample of adults hospitalized with general medical conditions. Errors were found to have contributed to temporary harm, permanent harm, or death in nearly 18% of patients; among patients who died, diagnostic error was judged to have contributed to death in 6.6% of cases. The researchers noted that problems with choosing and interpreting tests and the processes involved with clinician assessment were a high priority for improvement efforts.
AHRQ-funded; HS027369.
Citation: Auerbach AD, Lee TM, Hubbard CC .
Diagnostic errors in hospitalized adults who died or were transferred to intensive care.
JAMA Intern Med 2024 Feb; 184(2):164-73. doi: 10.1001/jamainternmed.2023.7347..
Keywords: Diagnostic Safety and Quality, Medical Errors, Hospitals, Inpatient Care, Quality of Care, Patient Safety, Adverse Events
Dalal AK, Schnipper JL, Raffel K
Identifying and classifying diagnostic errors in acute care across hospitals: early lessons from the Utility of Predictive Systems in Diagnostic Errors (UPSIDE) study.
This paper describes the Utility of Predictive Systems in Diagnostic Errors (UPSIDE) study, whose aim was to define the prevalence and underlying causes of diagnostic errors (DEs) in patients who die in the hospital or are transferred to the intensive care unit (ICU) after the first 48 hours. This study was conducted at 31 hospitals with more than 2500 cases reviewed using electronic health records. The authors identified some insights into key requirements into building a robust DE surveillance program by developing these steps: 1) Develop a shared understanding of what constitutes a diagnostic error; 2) Use validated tools to identify diagnostic errors and classify process failures, but respect your context; 3) Develop a standard approach to using electronic health records for case reviews; 4) Ensure reliability and consistency of the case review process; and 5) Link diagnostic error case reviews to institutional safety programs. They also developed steps to establish a diagnosis error review process at the hospital level with six processes.
AHRQ-funded; HS027369; HS026613.
Citation: Dalal AK, Schnipper JL, Raffel K .
Identifying and classifying diagnostic errors in acute care across hospitals: early lessons from the Utility of Predictive Systems in Diagnostic Errors (UPSIDE) study.
J Hosp Med 2024 Feb; 19(2):140-45. doi: 10.1002/jhm.13136..
Keywords: Diagnostic Safety and Quality, Medical Errors, Adverse Events, Patient Safety, Quality of Care, Hospitals
Newman-Toker DE, Nassery N, Schaffer AC
Burden of serious harms from diagnostic error in the USA.
Americans who experience serious harm from misdiagnosis annually. Serious harm is defined as permanent morbidity or morality. This cross-sectional analysis used nationally representative observational data. The authors estimated annual incident vascular events and infections from 21.5 million (M) sampled US hospital discharges (2012-2014). US-based cancer registries were used to find annual new cancers. They derived diagnostic errors and serious harms by multiplying by literature-based rates for disease-specific incidences for 15 major vascular events, infections and cancers ('Big Three' categories). Extrapolating to all diseases (including non-'Big Three' dangerous disease categories), they estimated total serious harms annually in the USA to be 795,000 (plausible range 598,000-1,023,000). Using more conservative assumptions they estimated 549,000 serious harms. These results were compatible with setting-specific serious harm estimates from inpatient, emergency department and ambulatory care. Fifteen dangerous diseases accounted for 50.7% of total serious harms and the top 5 (stroke, sepsis, pneumonia, venous thromboembolism and lung cancer) accounted for 38.7%.
AHRQ-funded; HS027614; HS029350.
Citation: Newman-Toker DE, Nassery N, Schaffer AC .
Burden of serious harms from diagnostic error in the USA.
BMJ Qual Saf 2024 Jan 19; 33(2):109-20. doi: 10.1136/bmjqs-2021-014130..
Keywords: Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project (HCUP), Diagnostic Safety and Quality, Medical Errors, Patient Safety, Quality of Care, Adverse Events
Li J
Home health agencies with high quality of patient care star ratings reduced short-term hospitalization rates and increased days independently at home.
Accurate Medicare Quality of Patient Care home health star ratings are crucial to helping patients find high-quality care, yet critics of these ratings indicate that they are not valid. The purpose of this retrospective study was to assess whether using the highest-rated home health agency available in a ZIP code improves outcomes. The researchers included 1,870,080 Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries using home health care from July 2015 through July 2016 in the United States. The study found that treatment by the highest-rated agencies available decreased risks of hospitalization, emergency department use, and institutionalization during the initial episode, and increased days independently at home by 2.6% or 3.75 days in the 180 days after the end of the initial episode. Treatment effects were stronger for agencies that were above-average, had 1 or more stars than the next-best agency, and nonrural residents. Effects were positive for both postacute and community-entry patients.
AHRQ-funded; HS026836.
Citation: Li J .
Home health agencies with high quality of patient care star ratings reduced short-term hospitalization rates and increased days independently at home.
Med Care 2024 Jan; 62(1):11-20. doi: 10.1097/mlr.0000000000001930..
Keywords: Home Healthcare, Quality of Care, Hospitalization, Provider Performance