Variation in the Reporting of Elective Surgeries and Its Influence on Patient Safety Indicators


      US hospital safety is routinely measured via Patient Safety Indicators (PSIs). Receiving a score for most PSIs requires a minimum number of qualifying cases to meet specific criteria; for example, whether an admission was elective. Because admission type is determined by hospitals’ internal policies, the study team suspected that hospitals may be exempted from elective-based PSI scores as a result of their internal admission classification policies.


      Multiple regression was combined with machine learning to analyze Medicare inpatient claims data reported by 3,484 hospitals during the 2015–2017 PSI measurement period. The researchers examined the average percentage of elective admissions across surgical diagnosis-related groups (DRGs) (average percent elective [APE]) in relation to hospital characteristics, surgical claims volumes, and numbers and types of surgical DRGs. This study asked whether hospitals with exceptionally low APE shared particular characteristics, reported claims for similar DRGs, or were disproportionately exempted from elective-based PSIs.


      Cross-validated multiple regression explained 73.9% of variation in APE among hospitals and identified surgical claims volume and 16 surgical DRGs as consistently important variables. However, the exceptionally low APE of 96 hospitals could not be explained by surgical claims volume, surgical DRGs among claims, or hospital characteristics. These outliers were disproportionately exempt from elective-based PSI scores.


      Some hospitals may have classified admissions in a way that exempted them from elective-based PSI scores. Transparency into admission classification policies is needed to ensure fair and reliable use of PSIs when ranking hospitals and adjusting payments. Alternatively, PSIs may need modifications to rely on externally validated criteria.
      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment

      Purchase one-time access:

      Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online access
      One-time access price info
      • For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
      • For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'


      Subscribe to Joint Commission Journal on Quality and Patient Safety
      Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
      Already an online subscriber? Sign in
      Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect


        • Romano PS
        • et al.
        A national profile of patient safety in US hospitals.
        Health Aff (Millwood). 2003; 22: 154-166
        • Hota B
        • et al.
        Consumer rankings and health care: toward validation and transparency.
        Jt Comm J Qual Patient Saf. 2016; 42: 439-446
        • Bilimoria KY
        • et al.
        Evaluation of surveillance bias and the validity of the venous thromboembolism quality measure.
        JAMA. 2013 Oct 9; 310: 1482-1489
        • Farmer SA
        • Black B
        • Bonow RO.
        Tension between quality measurement, public quality reporting, and pay for performance.
        JAMA. 2013 Jan 23; 309: 349-350
        • Houchens RL
        • Elixhauser A
        • Romano PS.
        How often are potential patient safety events present on admission?.
        Jt Comm J Qual Patient Saf. 2008; 34: 154-163
        • Polancich S
        • Restrepo E
        • Prosser J.
        Cautious use of administrative data for decubitus ulcer outcome reporting.
        Am J Med Qual. 2006; 21: 262-268
        • Rajaram R
        • et al.
        Hospital characteristics associated with penalties in the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services Hospital-Acquired Condition Reduction Program.
        JAMA. 2015 Jul 28; 314: 375-383
        • Rajaram R
        • Barnard C
        • Bilimoria KY.
        Concerns about using the Patient Safety Indicator-90 composite in pay-for-performance programs.
        JAMA. 2015 Mar 3; 313: 897-898
        • Rosen AK
        • et al.
        Validating the Patient Safety Indicators in the Veterans Health Administration: do they accurately identify true safety events?.
        Med Care. 2012; 50: 74-85
        • Kubasiak JC
        • et al.
        Patient Safety Indicators for judging hospital performance: still not ready for prime time.
        Am J Med Qual. 2017; 32: 129-133
        • Leeds IL
        • Kachalia A
        • Haut ER.
        Rescuing failure to rescue—Patient Safety Indicator 04 on the brink of obsolescence.
        JAMA Surg. 2021 Feb 1; 156: 115-116
        • Sorber R
        • et al.
        Patient Safety Indicators are an insufficient performance metric to track and grade outcomes of open aortic repair.
        J Vasc Surg. 2021; 73 (e5): 240-249
        • Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ)
        Patient Safety Indicators Software Instruction, SAS Version 4.3.
        AHRQ, Rockville, MD2011
        • Scali ST
        • et al.
        Impact of hospital volume on patient safety indicators and failure to rescue following open aortic aneurysm repair.
        J Vasc Surg. 2020; 71 (e4): 1135-1146
        • Shin MH
        • et al.
        Examining the validity of AHRQ's Patient Safety Indicators (PSIs): is variation in PSI composite score related to hospital organizational factors?.
        Med Care Res Rev. 2014; 71: 599-618
        • Mardon RE
        • et al.
        Exploring relationships between hospital patient safety culture and adverse events.
        J Patient Saf. 2010; 6: 226-232
      1. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. Patient Safety Indicator 10 (PSI 10) Postoperative Acute Kidney Injury Requiring Dialysis Rate. Jul 2021. Accessed May 24, 2022.

      2. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. Patient Safety Indicator 11 (PSI 11) Postoperative Respiratory Failure Rate. Jul 2021. Accessed May 24, 2022.

      3. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. Patient Safety Indicator 13 (PSI 13) Postoperative Sepsis Rate. Jul 2021. Accessed May 24, 2022.

        • Zrelak PA
        • et al.
        Incorporating harms into the weighting of the revised Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality Patient Safety for Selected Indicators Composite (Patient Safety Indicator 90).
        Health Serv Res. 2022; : 57654-57667
      4. Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services. Hospitals Data Archive. Accessed May 24, 2022.

        • Zikos D
        • et al.
        A supervised pattern analysis of the length of stay for hip replacement admissions.
        Healthcare (Basel). 2019 Apr 6; 7: 58
        • McHugh M
        • Regenstein M
        • Siegel B.
        The profitability of Medicare admissions based on source of admission.
        Acad Emerg Med. 2008; 15: 900-907
        • Grace TR
        • et al.
        Hip fractures and the bundle: a cost analysis of patients undergoing hip arthroplasty for femoral neck fracture vs degenerative joint disease.
        J Arthroplasty. 2018; 33: 1681-1685
        • Sassoon A
        • et al.
        Total hip arthroplasty for femoral neck fracture: comparing in-hospital mortality, complications, and disposition to an elective patient population.
        J Arthroplasty. 2013; 28: 1659-1662
        • Wu VJ
        • et al.
        Complications following total hip arthroplasty: a nationwide database study comparing elective vs hip fracture cases.
        J Arthroplasty. 2020; 35 (e3): 2144-2148
      5. Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services. Major Joint Replacement (Hip or Knee). Nov 2020. Accessed May 24, 2022.

      6. CareJourney. Home page. Accessed May 24, 2002.

      7. Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services. LDS Inpatient Data Dictionary. 2011. Accessed May 24, 2022.

      8. statsmodels. OLSResults.outlier_test. Accessed May 24, 2022.

      9. scikit-learn. 2.3. Clustering. Accessed Mar 24, 2022.

        • Ordonez C.
        Clustering binary data streams with k-means.
        in: DMKD ’03: Proceedings of the 8th ACM SIGMOD Workshop on Research Issues in Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery, New York Association for Computing Machinery, 2003: 12-19
        • Abdi H
        • Valentin D.
        Multiple correspondence analysis.
        in: Salkind E Encyclopedia of Measurement and Statistics. Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA2007: 651-657
        • Fujihara N
        • et al.
        The effect of economic downturn on the volume of surgical procedures: a systematic review.
        Int J Surg. 2017; 44: 56-63
        • Tonna JE
        • et al.
        Balancing revenue generation with capacity generation: case distribution, financial impact and hospital capacity changes from cancelling or resuming elective surgeries in the US during COVID-19.
        BMC Health Serv Res. 2020 May 4; (Preprint)
      10. Orlando Sentinel. Over Capacity, Florida Hospital Orlando Temporarily Stops Admitting Patients. Miller NS. Mar 18, 2016. Accessed May 24, 2022.