Application of Patient Safety Indicators Internationally

A Pilot Study Among Seven Countries

Published In: International Journal For Quality In Health Care, v. 21, no. 4, Aug. 2009, p. 272-278

Posted on RAND.org on August 01, 2009

by Saskia E. Drösler, Niek S. Klazinga, Patrick Romano, Daniel J. Tancredi, Maria A. Gogorcena Aoiz, Moira C. Hewitt, Sarah Scobie, Michael Soop, Eugene Wen, Hude Quan, et al.

Read More

Access further information on this document at Oxford University Press

This article was published outside of RAND. The full text of the article can be found at the link above.

OBJECTIVE: To explore the potential for international comparison of patient safety as part of the Health Care Quality Indicators project of the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) by evaluating patient safety indicators originally published by the US Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ). DESIGN: A retrospective cross-sectional study. SETTING: Acute care hospitals in the USA, UK, Sweden, Spain, Germany, Canada and Australia in 2004 and 2005/2006. DATA SOURCES: Routine hospitalization-related administrative data from seven countries were analyzed. Using algorithms adapted to the diagnosis and procedure coding systems in place in each country, authorities in each of the participating countries reported summaries of the distribution of hospital-level and overall (national) rates for each AHRQ Patient Safety Indicator to the OECD project secretariat. RESULTS: Each country's vector of national indicator rates and the vector of American patient safety indicators rates published by AHRQ (and re-estimated as part of this study) were highly correlated (0.821–0.966). However, there was substantial systematic variation in rates across countries. CONCLUSIONS: This pilot study reveals that AHRQ Patient Safety Indicators can be applied to international hospital data. However, the analyses suggest that certain indicators (e.g. 'birth trauma', 'complications of anesthesia') may be too unreliable for international comparisons. Data quality varies across countries; undercoding may be a systematic problem in some countries. Efforts at international harmonization of hospital discharge data sets as well as improved accuracy of documentation should facilitate future comparative analyses of routine databases.

This report is part of the RAND Corporation External publication series. Many RAND studies are published in peer-reviewed scholarly journals, as chapters in commercial books, or as documents published by other organizations.

Our mission to help improve policy and decisionmaking through research and analysis is enabled through our core values of quality and objectivity and our unwavering commitment to the highest level of integrity and ethical behavior. To help ensure our research and analysis are rigorous, objective, and nonpartisan, we subject our research publications to a robust and exacting quality-assurance process; avoid both the appearance and reality of financial and other conflicts of interest through staff training, project screening, and a policy of mandatory disclosure; and pursue transparency in our research engagements through our commitment to the open publication of our research findings and recommendations, disclosure of the source of funding of published research, and policies to ensure intellectual independence. For more information, visit www.rand.org/about/principles.

The RAND Corporation is a nonprofit institution that helps improve policy and decisionmaking through research and analysis. RAND's publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions of its research clients and sponsors.