Developing and reporting a healthcare-associated infection composite score for health system board review

Abstract

Background

One strategy for supporting a hospital or health system's board of directors (Board), with their quality oversight responsibility is to review the organization's performance on quality measures. But for large systems, the number of measures needing review is quite burdensome and makes priority setting difficult. Our goal was to develop a scoring method that summarizes multiple quality measures together, while still maintaining the Board's opportunity to examine individual measures where there are specific concerns.

Methods

We calculated an overall health system-level composite performance score using six publicly reported healthcare-associated infections reported by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services on their Care Compare website [central-line associated bloodstream infections (CLABSI), catheter-associated urinary tract infections (CAUTI), surgical site infections (SSIs) for colon surgery and abdominal hysterectomy, hospital-onset Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia (MRSA), and hospital-onset Clostridioides difficile (C. diff)], where relative weights assigned to each infection type reflect the severity of patient harm. We also calculated a health-system composite performance target. For individual infection types, we calculated system-wide scores and targets and categorized individual hospital performance into three performance categories.

Results

The health system's composite score between 2015 and 2019 ranged from a high of 1.10 to a low of 0.71. The health system's composite score in 2017–2019 was better than the composite target. Of the 34 measures used to calculate the 2019 composite score, 20 were better than internal standardized infection ratio (SIR) targets, seven were between internal targets and SIR of 1.0, and seven were worse than SIR of 1.0.

Discussion

The Board communicated they find this composite score reporting approach helpful for streamlining their understanding of HAI performance, as compared to traditional approaches of reporting out individual performance measures. Approaches that streamline Board review of quality and safety performance are important as we hold Board members accountable for overseeing quality, seek greater engagement from the Board, and work to minimize measure review overload.