HEALTHCAR E DE LIVE RY
Worrying findings on mortality rates
An international study has found that high-need older patients had the highest mortality rates of any country, despite performing relatively well on several other measures of quality of hospital care.
An international study has used electronic medical records to compare the cost and quality of care between healthcare systems in 11 OECD countries, including the NHS in England. The International Collaborative on Costs, Outcomes and Needs in Care (ICCONIC) study has been led by researchers at Harvard University and LSE, and co-funded by the Commonwealth Fund and the Health Foundation. The data for England – compiled and analysed by the Health Foundation – has focused on two groups of high-need older patients which represent priority areas for the NHS and other health systems – those hospitalised with a hip fracture and those hospitalised with heart failure who also have diabetes. Looking at pre-pandemic data from 2014/15 to 2017/18, the study found that,
for both groups of patients, England had the highest mortality rates of any country, despite performing relatively well on several other measures of quality of hospital care. One year after hip fracture surgery, almost a third (31%) of patients in England had died of any cause compared with less than a quarter of patients in in Canada (23%), Australia (22%) and France (20%). Another key area where England stands out from other countries included in the analysis is the length of time that hip fracture patients spend in hospital. Patients in England spent an average of 21.7 days in hospital after their surgery – the highest of all 11 countries evaluated.
The findings add weight to national audits that have identified several areas for improvement in the care of hip fracture
patients. More generally, the study provides further evidence that, while the NHS remains a relatively low-cost healthcare system that performs well in some areas, mortality rates for some patients are higher than in comparable countries – including in key areas such as cancer and cardiovascular disease.
The Health Foundation says the findings warrant further investigation – it notes that it is notoriously difficult to draw comparisons between healthcare systems that serve different populations and collect information about patients in different ways, and that doing so often raises more questions than it answers. The independent charity says that the results ultimately highlight major gaps in the available data in England and the need for investment to better understand what is happening to patient care across acute hospitals, rehabilitation services, support in the community and social care. However, by using patient-level data (which was not shared between countries) and enabling comparisons across primary, secondary and post-acute care, the ICCONIC study provides healthcare policymakers with vital information on how current care strategies are influencing the quality of care in the NHS in England, while also highlighting opportunities to significantly improve productivity. The Health Foundation says that such improvements in productivity are much needed as the NHS grapples with a growing elective care backlog that has accumulated during the pandemic and widespread workforce shortages. A key area highlighted by the study is the potential to free up additional capacity by reducing the time that patients remain in hospital after hip fracture surgery – the most common reason for emergency surgery. The Health Foundation says that there is broad agreement that hospital is not the best place for a frail older patient to stay following surgery, as it is not conducive to rehabilitation. By investing in post-hospital
JANUARY 2022
WWW.CLINICALSERVICESJOURNAL.COM l 77
▲
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84
