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
Topics
- Access to Care (1)
- Cancer (3)
- Cancer: Breast Cancer (1)
- Cancer: Lung Cancer (1)
- Case Study (1)
- Children/Adolescents (1)
- Chronic Conditions (1)
- Clinical Decision Support (CDS) (1)
- (-) COVID-19 (14)
- (-) Diagnostic Safety and Quality (14)
- Disparities (1)
- Emergency Department (2)
- Healthcare Costs (1)
- Health Information Technology (HIT) (2)
- Hospitals (2)
- Imaging (2)
- Inpatient Care (1)
- Medical Errors (1)
- Pneumonia (1)
- Provider: Health Personnel (1)
- Public Health (1)
- Quality of Care (1)
- Racial and Ethnic Minorities (1)
- Respiratory Conditions (1)
- Risk (2)
- Social Determinants of Health (1)
- Telehealth (1)
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 14 of 14 Research Studies DisplayedMeiselbach MK, Bai G, Anderson GF
Charges of COVID-19 diagnostic testing and antibody testing across facility types and states.
The authors discuss the practice of high charges for COVID-19 testing by some healthcare providers, with the charges for COVID-19 testing having important implications for uninsured patients, out-of-network services, and other payers without negotiating power. The purpose of this study was to examine the charges for the most commonly performed COVID-19 diagnostic test and antibody test across facility types and states. The study found that for COVID-19 diagnostic testing, the mean, median, and standard deviations of charges were $144.06, $100.00, and $162.18. The most common facility type was independent laboratories (performing 49.7% of all tests), with an average charge of $140.41, followed by hospital outpatient settings (performing 34.5% of all tests), with an average charge of $168.87. For antibody testing, the mean, median, and standard deviations of charges were $63.93, $55.00, and $48.92. Independent laboratories performed 97.2% of all tests, with an average charge of $62.30. In sum, 8.0% of diagnostic testing services and 14.0% of antibody testing claims were charged one standard deviation above the mean ($306.24 for diagnostic testing and $112.85 for antibody testing). The state average testing charges ranged between $64.98 (UT) and $505.65 (DC) for diagnostic testing, and $45.85 (NY) and $195.41 (NM) for antibody testing. AR, LA, MO, and NM had high average charges for both tests. GA, KS, MA, MD, NC, NV, and OK had low charges for both tests. No statistically significant association was found between testing charges and state-level testing rates, infection rates, or mortality rates.
AHRQ-funded; HS000029.
Citation: Meiselbach MK, Bai G, Anderson GF .
Charges of COVID-19 diagnostic testing and antibody testing across facility types and states.
J Gen Intern Med 2023 Dec; 38(16):3640-43. doi: 10.1007/s11606-020-06198-y..
Keywords: COVID-19, Diagnostic Safety and Quality, Healthcare Costs
Auerbach AD, Astik GJ, O'Leary KJ
Prevalence and causes of diagnostic errors in hospitalized patients under investigation for COVID-19.
During the COVID-19 pandemic, clinicians were required to address a disease with continuously changing traits while simultaneously complying with changes in care (e.g., physical distancing) that could contribute to diagnostic errors (DEs). The purpose of this study was to examine the frequency of DEs and their causes in patients hospitalized under investigation (PUI) for COVID-19. The researchers randomly selected up to 8 cases per site per month for evaluation, with each case evaluated by two clinicians to determine whether a DE occurred, and whether any diagnostic process faults took place. The study found that wo hundred and fifty-seven patient charts were evaluated, of which 14% contained a DE. Patients with and without DE were statistically similar in socioeconomic factors, comorbidities, risk factors for COVID-19, and COVID-19 test turnaround time and eventual positivity. The most common diagnostic process issues contributing to DE were problems with clinical assessment, testing choices, history taking, and physical examination. Diagnostic process issues related with COVID-19 policies and procedures were not related with DE risk. 35.9% of patients with errors and 5.4% of patients overall suffered harm or death due to diagnostic error.
AHRQ-funded; HS027369.
Citation: Auerbach AD, Astik GJ, O'Leary KJ .
Prevalence and causes of diagnostic errors in hospitalized patients under investigation for COVID-19.
J Gen Intern Med 2023 Jun; 38(8):1902-10. doi: 10.1007/s11606-023-08176-6..
Keywords: COVID-19, Diagnostic Safety and Quality, Hospitals, Inpatient Care, Quality of Care
Prasad PA, Correia J, Fang MC
Performance of point-of-care severity scores to predict prognosis in patients admitted through the emergency department with COVID-19.
The purpose of this study was to determine whether sepsis risk stratification scores can predict poor outcomes among hospitalized COVID-19 patients. The researchers retrospectively evaluated a cohort of adults presenting with COVID-19 to 156 Hospital Corporation of America (HCA) Healthcare emergency departments (Eds) from March 2, 2020, to February 11, 2021. The study administered the Quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (qSOFA), Shock Index, National Early Warning System-2 (NEWS2), and quick COVID-19 Severity Index (qCSI) at patient presentation. The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality, and secondary outcomes included intensive care unit (ICU) admission, mechanical ventilation, and vasopressors receipt. The study identified 90,376 patients with community-acquired COVID-19. 17.2% of patients died in-hospital, 28.6% went to the ICU, 13.7% received mechanical ventilation, and 13.6% received vasopressors. There were 3.8% qSOFA-positive, 45.1% Shock Index-positive, 49.8% NEWS2-positive, and 37.6% qCSI-positive at ED-triage. NEWS2 exhibited the highest AUROC for in-hospital mortality, followed by ICU admission, mechanical ventilation, and vasopressor receipt. The researchers concluded that sepsis severity scores at presentation have low discriminative power to predict outcomes in COVID-19 patients and are not reliable for clinical use.
AHRQ-funded; HS027369.
Citation: Prasad PA, Correia J, Fang MC .
Performance of point-of-care severity scores to predict prognosis in patients admitted through the emergency department with COVID-19.
J Hosp Med 2023 May; 18(5):413-23. doi: 10.1002/jhm.13106..
Keywords: COVID-19, Emergency Department, Diagnostic Safety and Quality
Peng L, Luo G, Walker A
Evaluation of federated learning variations for COVID-19 diagnosis using chest radiographs from 42 US and European hospitals.
The goals of this study were to compare a single-site, COVID-19 computer diagnosis system that used the Federated Averaging (FedAvg) algorithm with 3-client Federated learning (FL) models, and to evaluate the performance of the four FL variations. Researchers leveraged a FL healthcare collaborative that included data from five US and European healthcare systems encompassing 42 hospitals. They concluded that FedAvg could significantly improve generalization of the model in comparison with other personalization FL algorithms--FedProx, FedBN, and FedAMP--but at the cost of poor internal validity.
AHRQ-funded; HS026379.
Citation: Peng L, Luo G, Walker A .
Evaluation of federated learning variations for COVID-19 diagnosis using chest radiographs from 42 US and European hospitals.
J Am Med Inform Assoc 2022 Dec 13;30(1):54-63. doi: 10.1093/jamia/ocac188..
Keywords: COVID-19, Diagnostic Safety and Quality, Imaging, Hospitals
Sun J, Peng L, Li T
Performance of a chest radiograph AI diagnostic tool for COVID-19: a prospective observational study.
The purpose of this observational study was to evaluate the real-time performance of an interpretable artificial intelligence (AI) model to detect COVID-19 on chest radiographs. The researchers utilized 95,363 chest radiographs for model training, external validation, and real-time validation. There were 5,335 real-time predictions and a COVID-19 prevalence of 4.8%. The study found that participants positive for COVID-19 had higher COVID-19 diagnostic scores than participants negative for COVID-19. Real-time model performance remained the same during the 19 weeks of implementation. Model sensitivity was higher in men than in women, but model specificity was higher in women. Sensitivity was higher for Asian and Black participants compared with White participants. The COVID-19 AI diagnostic system had worse accuracy compared with radiologist predictions. The researchers concluded that AI tools underperform when compared with radiologist results.
AHRQ-funded; HS026379.
Citation: Sun J, Peng L, Li T .
Performance of a chest radiograph AI diagnostic tool for COVID-19: a prospective observational study.
Radiol Artif Intell 2022 Jul;4(4):e210217. doi: 10.1148/ryai.210217..
Keywords: COVID-19, Imaging, Diagnostic Safety and Quality, Health Information Technology (HIT)
Lowry KP, Bissell MCS, Miglioretti DL
Breast biopsy recommendations and breast cancers diagnosed during the COVID-19 pandemic.
The authors sought to examine breast biopsy recommendations and breast cancers diagnosed before and during the COVID-19 pandemic by mode of detection and women's characteristics. Using data from the Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium, they found that there were substantially fewer breast biopsies with cancer diagnoses during the COVID-19 pandemic from March to September 2020 compared to the same period in 2019, with Asian and Hispanic women experiencing the largest declines followed by Black women.
AHRQ-funded; HS018366.
Citation: Lowry KP, Bissell MCS, Miglioretti DL .
Breast biopsy recommendations and breast cancers diagnosed during the COVID-19 pandemic.
Radiology 2022 May;303(2):287-94. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2021211808..
Keywords: COVID-19, Cancer: Breast Cancer, Cancer, Diagnostic Safety and Quality
Woloshin S, Dewitt B, Krishnamurti T
Assessing how consumers interpret and act on results from at-home COVID-19 self-test kits: a randomized clinical trial.
The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) authorized SARS-CoV-2 rapid at-home self-test kits for individuals with and without symptoms. How appropriately users interpret and act on the results of at-home COVID-19 self-tests is unknown. The objective of this study was to assess how users of at-home COVID-19 self-test kits interpreted and acted on results when given instructions authorized by the FDA, instructions based on decision science principles, or no instructions.
AHRQ-funded; HS024075.
Citation: Woloshin S, Dewitt B, Krishnamurti T .
Assessing how consumers interpret and act on results from at-home COVID-19 self-test kits: a randomized clinical trial.
JAMA Intern Med 2022 Mar;182(3):332-41. doi: 10.1001/jamainternmed.2021.8075..
Keywords: COVID-19, Diagnostic Safety and Quality
Roberts JE, Campbell JI, Gauvreau K
Differentiating multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children: a single-centre retrospective cohort study.
This study’s objective was to identify clinical and laboratory findings that distinguished multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children (MIS-C) from febrile illnesses in which MIS-C was considered but ultimately excluded, and to examine the diseases that most often mimicked MIS-C in a tertiary medical center. All children who were hospitalized at the author’s center with fever were evaluated for MIS-C and were compared for clinical signs and symptoms, SARS-CoV-2 status, and laboratory studies between those with and without MIS-C. The authors identified 50 confirmed MIS-C cases (MIS-C(+)) and 68 children evaluated for, but ultimately not diagnosed with, MIS-C (MIS-C(-)). Symptoms of conjunctivitis, abdominal pain, fatigue, hypoxaemia, tachypnoea and hypotension at presentation were significantly more common among MIS-C(+) patients, with MIS-C(+) and MIS-C(-) patients having similar elevations in C-reactive protein (CRP), but were differentiated by thrombocytopenia, lymphopenia, and elevated ferritin, neutrophil/lymphocyte ratio, BNP and troponin. Children hospitalized with MIS-C were older, more likely to present with conjunctivitis, oral mucosa changes, abdominal pain and hypotension, and had higher neutrophil/lymphocyte ratios and lower platelet counts.
AHRQ-funded; HS000063.
Citation: Roberts JE, Campbell JI, Gauvreau K .
Differentiating multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children: a single-centre retrospective cohort study.
Arch Dis Child 2022 Mar; 107(3):e3. doi: 10.1136/archdischild-2021-322290..
Keywords: Children/Adolescents, COVID-19, Chronic Conditions, Diagnostic Safety and Quality
Byhoff E, Paulus JK, Guardado R
Healthcare workers' perspectives on coronavirus testing availability: a cross sectional survey.
This article describes a survey that was conducted during the first wave of the COVID pandemic during March-August 2020 of hospital workers on their perceptions of, access to, and receipt of COVID testing. A survey was given to all hospital employees in a single academic medical center in Boston, Massachusetts. A total of 2543 employees responded to the survey. Respondents were mostly female (76%), white (55%), with the mean age being 40 years. They were nurses (27%), administrators (22%), and patient support roles (22%) of which 56% of respondents wanted COVID testing. Age, full-time status, employment tenure, changes in quality of life, changes in job duties, and worries about enough sick paid leave were associated with testing. Nurses were more likely to want testing than administrators and patient support staff.
AHRQ-funded; HS026008.
Citation: Byhoff E, Paulus JK, Guardado R .
Healthcare workers' perspectives on coronavirus testing availability: a cross sectional survey.
BMC Health Serv Res 2021 Jul 21;21(1):719. doi: 10.1186/s12913-021-06741-5..
Keywords: COVID-19, Diagnostic Safety and Quality, Provider: Health Personnel, Public Health
Shipe ME, Haddad DN, Deppen SA
Modeling the impact of delaying the diagnosis of non-small cell lung cancer during COVID-19
The novel coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic has led surgical societies to recommend delaying diagnosis and treatment of suspected lung cancer for lesions less than 2 cm. The COVID-19 infection rate at which immediate operative risk exceeds benefit is unknown. Delaying diagnosis can lead to disease progression, but the impact of this delay on mortality is unknown. In this study, the investigators sought to model immediate versus delayed surgical resection in a suspicious lung nodule less than 2 cm.
AHRQ-funded; HS026122.
Citation: Shipe ME, Haddad DN, Deppen SA .
Modeling the impact of delaying the diagnosis of non-small cell lung cancer during COVID-19
Ann Thorac Surg 2021 Jul;112(1):248-54. doi: 10.1016/j.athoracsur.2020.08.025..
Keywords: COVID-19, Cancer: Lung Cancer, Cancer, Diagnostic Safety and Quality, Case Study, Risk
Lacson R, Shi J, Kapoor N
Exacerbation of inequities in use of diagnostic radiology during the early stages of reopening after COVID-19.
Researchers assessed diagnostic radiology examination utilization and associated social determinants of health during the early stages of reopening after state-mandated shutdown of nonurgent services because of COVID-19. They found that, despite resumption of nonurgent services, a marked decrease in radiology examination utilization persisted in all care settings post-shutdown, with more significantly decreased odds ratios for having examinations in inpatient and outpatient settings versus in the emergency department. Inequities worsened, with patients from communities with high rates of poverty, unemployment, and chronic disease having significantly lower odds of undergoing radiology examinations post-shutdown. Patients of Asian race and Hispanic ethnicity had significantly lower odds ratios for having examinations post-shutdown compared with White and non-Hispanic patients, respectively.
AHRQ-funded; HS024722.
Citation: Lacson R, Shi J, Kapoor N .
Exacerbation of inequities in use of diagnostic radiology during the early stages of reopening after COVID-19.
J Am Coll Radiol 2021 May;18(5):696-703. doi: 10.1016/j.jacr.2020.12.009..
Keywords: COVID-19, Disparities, Diagnostic Safety and Quality, Racial and Ethnic Minorities, Social Determinants of Health
Davis K, Wilbur K, Metzger S
Symptom and needs assessment screening in oncology patients: alternate outreach methods during COVID-19.
This initiative’s goal was to develop alternate outreach methods to cancer patients without access to an electronic portal during COVID-19. The authors implemented a standardized telephone outreach process targeting patients without active electronic portal accounts to improve remote symptom monitoring. A total of 172 screens were completed, identifying 110 needs for 63 individuals. Twenty-eight patients completed patient enrollment, with outreach calls capturing a higher percentage of Black patients (34%) and older adults age 61-80 years old (69%) compared to portal users.
AHRQ-funded; HS026170.
Citation: Davis K, Wilbur K, Metzger S .
Symptom and needs assessment screening in oncology patients: alternate outreach methods during COVID-19.
J Psychosoc Oncol 2021;39(3):452-60. doi: 10.1080/07347332.2021.1890663..
Keywords: COVID-19, Cancer, Access to Care, Telehealth, Health Information Technology (HIT), Diagnostic Safety and Quality
Joshi RP, Pejaver V, Hammarlund NE
A predictive tool for identification of SARS-CoV-2 PCR-negative emergency department patients using routine test results.
This retrospective case-control study investigated whether the use of a prediction tool based on complete blood count results and patient sex can better allocate testing for SARS-CoV-2 PCR testing in hospital emergency departments. Participants were emergency department patients who had concurrent complete blood counts and SARS-CoV-2 PCR testing in Northern California, Seattle, Washington, Chicago Illinois, and South Korea. A hypothetical scenario of 1000 patients requiring testing was developed, but in this scenario testing resources are limited to 60% of patients. This tool would allow a 33% increase in properly allocated resources.
AHRQ-funded; HS026385.
Citation: Joshi RP, Pejaver V, Hammarlund NE .
A predictive tool for identification of SARS-CoV-2 PCR-negative emergency department patients using routine test results.
J Clin Virol 2020 Aug;129:104502. doi: 10.1016/j.jcv.2020.104502..
Keywords: Emergency Department, COVID-19, Pneumonia, Respiratory Conditions, Diagnostic Safety and Quality, Clinical Decision Support (CDS)
Gandhi TK, Singh H
Reducing the risk of diagnostic error in the COVID-19 era.
This perspective article discusses anticipated diagnoses errors for positive or negative COVID-19 results. The errors are classified using user-friendly nomenclature. Mitigation strategies are discussed including technology for cognitive support, optimized workflow and communication, people-focused interventions, organizational strategies, and state/federal policies and regulations.
AHRQ-funded; HS027363.
Citation: Gandhi TK, Singh H .
Reducing the risk of diagnostic error in the COVID-19 era.
J Hosp Med 2020 Jun;15(6):363-66. doi: 10.12788/jhm.3461..
Keywords: Diagnostic Safety and Quality, Risk, Medical Errors, COVID-19