Skip Navigation

This Article
Right arrow Full Text Freely available
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (7)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by HEGGESTAD, T.
Right arrow Articles by LILLEENG, S. E.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by HEGGESTAD, T.
Right arrow Articles by LILLEENG, S. E.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

International Journal for Quality in Health Care 15:147-154 (2003)
© 2003 International Society for Quality in Health Care

Paper

Measuring readmissions: focus on the time factor

TORHILD HEGGESTAD1 and SOLFRID E. LILLEENG2

1Sintef Unimed Health Services Research, Trondheim
2Department of Community Medicine and General Practice, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim, Norway

Objective. To assess the effects of choosing different time-intervals of observation when using unplanned readmissions as an outcome indicator.

Design. A conceptual model was developed based on the risk curve. The model assigned readmissions above a background level as ‘related’ to the earlier episode of illness. The characteristics of the hazard curve were used to estimate how the rates of related and unrelated readmissions varied with time.

Setting. Patients living in a region of Middle Norway served by eight acute-care hospitals and discharged in the year 1996.

Main outcome measure. The conditional risk (hazard rate) of having an unplanned readmission. The information gathered allowed inclusion of readmissions to all hospitals in the area, and to make risk corrections for deaths.

Results. The identified proportion of readmissions judged as related to the earlier episode of illness was found to be very sensitive to changes in the time interval. With the commonly used interval of 30 days, 0.5 of all related readmissions were identified, while 0.7 of the readmissions included at this time were estimated as related ones (‘true positives’). The hazard curve was different for medical and surgical patients, but the corresponding proportions of related and unrelated readmissions were relatively similar. Adjusting for deaths in the observation period did not result in significantly different risk curves.

Conclusion. When unplanned readmissions are used as an outcome indicator, the measure is susceptible to the choice of time interval. The operative characteristics must be interpreted in the context of where it is intended that the indicator should be used.

Keywords: acute care, hospital care, outcome assessment, patient readmission, time factors


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 American Journal of Medical QualityHome page
Lin Guo, E. S. Chung, D. E. Casey JR, and R. Snow
Redefining Hospital Readmissions to Better Reflect Clinical Course of Care for Heart Failure Patients
American Journal of Medical Quality, March 1, 2007; 22(2): 98 - 102.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.