Ambulatory Surgery Presentation

Description

Info about a surgery center

Reviews
Shared by: J Smith
Stats
views:
325
rating:
not rated
reviews:
0
posted:
11/1/2007
language:
English
pages:
0
How to understand and use National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey (NAMCS) and National Hospital Ambulatory Medical Care Survey (NHAMCS) data for clinical research Yuwei Zhu 10-29-2004 Dept of Biostatistics 1 Overview        I. Survey Background II. Survey Methodology III. Technical Considerations IV. Getting the Data – Using Raw Data Files V. Example VI. Data Analysis – SAS, STATA, SUDAAN VII. Other Public Domain Data 2 NAMCS and NHAMCS Performed by:  Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)  National Center for Health Statistics, Division of Health Care Statistics, and National Health Care Survey 3 National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey (NAMCS) History     Survey began in 1973 Annual data collection through 1981 Conducted in 1985 Annual began again in 1989 4 NAMCS  Classified by the American Medical Association and the American Osteopathic Association as delivering “office-based, patient care”  Healthcare providers within private, non–hospital-based clinics and health maintenance organizations (HMOs) are within the scope of the survey 5 NAMCS  Patient visits made to the offices of non– federally employed physicians – Excluding:  Anesthesiology  Radiology  Pathology 6 In-Scope NAMCS locations         Freestanding clinic Federally qualified health center Neighborhood and mental health centers Non-federal government clinic Family planning clinic HMO Faculty practice plan Private solo or group practice 7 Out-of-Scope NAMCS locations       Hospital EDs and OPDs Ambulatory surgicenter Institutional setting (schools, prisons) Industrial outpatient facility Federal Government operated clinic Laser vision surgery 8 NAMCS NAMCS uses a multistage probability sample design to obtain –Primary sampling units (PSUs) –Physician practices within the PSUs –Patient visits within physician practices 9 Sample design - NAMCS 112 PSUs (counties) – Counties – Groups of counties – County equivalents (such as parishes or independent cities) – Towns – Townships Nonfederally employed, office-based physicians stratified by specialty, 3,000 physicians About 30 visits per doctor over a randomly selected 1-week period, 25,000 visits 10 National Hospital Ambulatory Medical Care Survey (NHAMCS) History  Survey began in 1992 Annual data collection  11 NHAMCS   National sample of visits to the EDs and outpatient departments of noninstitutional general and short-stay hospitals in the United States Excluded hospitals: – Federal – Military – Veterans Administration 12 NHAMCS This survey uses a 4-stage probability design with samples –geographically defined areas –hospitals within these areas –clinics within the hospital –patient visits within clinics. The first stage is similar to NAMCS 13 Sample design - NHAMCS 112 PSUs (counties) Panel of 600 non-Federal, general or short stay hospitals Clinics (OPDs) and emergency service areas (EDs), 400 EDs and 250 OPDs About 200 visits per OPD, 100 per ED over random 4-week period, 37,000 ED and 35,000 OPD visits 14 NHAMCS Scope  OPD was intended to be parallel to the NAMCS in the hospital setting  General medicine, surgery, pediatrics, ob/gyn, substance abuse, and “other” clinics are inscope Ancillary services are out of scope  15 Data Items   Patient characteristics – Age, sex, race, ethnicity Visit characteristics – Source of payment, continuity of care, reason for visit, diagnosis, treatment   Provider characteristics – Physician specialty, hospital ownership… Drug characteristics added in 1980 – Class, composition, control status, etc. 16 Repeating fields (from text entries)     Up to 3 fields each… – Reason for visit – Physician’s diagnosis – Cause of injury Diagnostic services (6 fields) Surgical procedures (2 fields) Medications (6 fields) – Drug ingredients (5 fields) – Therapeutic class (3 fields – 2002 on) 17 Coding Systems Used     Reason for Visit Classification (NCHS) ICD-9-CM for diagnoses, causes of injury and procedures Drug Classification System (NCHS) National Drug Code Directory 18 Drug Data in NAMCS/ NHAMCS What is a “Drug Mention” ? Any of up to 6 medications that were ordered, supplied, administered, or continued during the visit. Respondents are asked to report trade names or generic names only (not dosage, administration, or regimen). 19 Drug Characteristics       Generic Name (for single ingredient drugs) Prescription Status Composition Status Controlled Substance Status Up to 3 NDC Therapeutic Classes (4-digit) Up to 5 Ingredients (for multiple ingredient drugs) 20 Some User Considerations      NAMCS/NHAMCS sample visits, not patients No estimates of incidence or prevalence No state-level estimates Not sampled by setting or by nonphysician providers May capture different types of care for solo vs. group practice physicians 21 Data uses       Understand health care practice Examine the quality of care Track certain conditions Find health disparities Measure Healthy People 2010 objectives Serve as benchmark for states 22 Data users       Over 100 journal publications in last 2 years Medical associations Government agencies Health services researchers University and medical schools Broadcast and print media 23 Sample Weight    Each NAMCS record contains a single weight, which we call Patient Visit Weight Same is true for OPD records and ED records This weight is used for both visits and drug mentions 24 Reliability of Estimates    Estimates should be based on at least 30 sample records AND Estimates with a relative standard error (standard error divided by the estimate) greater than 30 percent are considered unreliable by NCHS standards Both conditions should be met to obtain reliable estimates 25 How Good are the Estimates?   Depends on what you are looking at. In general, OPD estimates tend to be somewhat less reliable than NAMCS and ED. Since 1999, Advance Data reports include standard errors in every table so it is easy to compute confidence intervals around the estimates. 26 Sampling Error    NAMCS and NHAMCS are not simple random samples Clustering effects of visits within the physician’s practice, physician practices within PSUs, clinics within hospitals Must use some method to calculate standard errors for frequencies, percents, and rates 27 Ways to Improve Reliability of Estimates    Combine NAMCS, ED and OPD data to produce ambulatory care visit estimates Combine multiple years of data Aggregate categories of interest into broader groups. 28 NAMCS vs. NHAMCS  Consider what types of settings are best for a particular analysis – Persons of color are more likely to visit OPD's and ED's than physician offices – Persons in some age groups make disproportionately larger shares of visits to ED's than offices and OPD's 29 File Structure   Download data and layout from website http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/about/major/ahcd/ ahcd1.htm Flat ASCII files for each setting and year NAMCS: 1973-2002 NHAMCS: 1992-2002 30 Trend considerations       Variables routinely rotate on and off survey Be careful about trending diagnosis prior to 1979 because of ICDA (based on ICD-8) Even after 1980- be careful about changes in ICD-9-CM Number of medications varies over years 1980-81 – 8 medications 1985, 1989-94 – 5 medications 1995-2002 – 6 medications 2003+ – 8 medications Diagnostic & therapeutic checkboxes vary Use spreadsheet for significance of trends 31 Example Hypothesis -- Educational Efforts Targeted at Judicious Antibiotic Use Will Reduce Prescription Rates in all Treatment Settings 32 Study Design       Retrospective collection of data from – NAMCS – NHAMCS 1994-2000 study years Antibiotic prescribing patterns and diagnoses Children <5 years of age Clinic type -- Pediatric Physician type – Pediatrician or Family Medicine 33 Data Stratification    Race – White, Black and other Time period – 94 & 95, 96 & 97, 98 & 00 Antibiotics – Penicillin's, Cephalosporins, Erythromycin/lincosamide/macrolides,Tetracyclines, Chloramphenicol derivatives, Aminoglycosides, Sulfonamides and trimethoprim, Miscellaneous antibacterial agents, and Quinolone/derivatives  Diagnoses -- Otitis media, Sinusitis, Pharyngitis,Bronchitis,Upper respiratory tract infection (URI) 34 Overall Antibiotic Rates in Children <5 Based on Source of Care Rates per 1000 children 2000 1500 1000 500 0 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 Years Hospital-based ED Office-based 35 Total Care Years White Black Rate 95% CI Ratio 3102 1.34 1.22, 1.47* 1.02, 1.08* 0.70, 1.34 Visit rates 1994per 1000 1995 children aged <5 1996years 1997 19982000 4150 4529 4320 1.05 4204 4302 0.98 36 White children % Distribution health care visit site 100% Black Children 80% 60% 40% 20% Hospital-base ED Office-based 0% 1994- 1996- 19991995 1998 2000 Years 37 1994- 1996- 19991995 1998 2000 Total Care Antibiotic prescription rates per 1000 children aged <5 years Years 19941995 19961997 White 1494 Black 998 Rate 95% CI Ratio 1.50 1.48, 1.51* 1.08 0.96, 1.22 1421 1320 19982000 1118 1074 1.04 0.86, 1.24 38 Total Care Years 19941995 Rate White Black Ratio 816 520 1.57 95% CI 1.46, 1.69* 1.04, 1.07* 0.69, 1.58 Otitis media rates per 19961000 1997 children aged <5 1998years 2000 779 739 1.06 630 603 1.05 39 Results  Decline in antibiotic prescribing in children <5 years; most notable in office-based and emergency department settings Penicillin's were common antibiotics used Most common diagnosis in all three settings was otitis media Natasha B. Halasa, Marie R. Griffin, Yuwei Zhu, and Kathryn M. Edwards. Difference in antibiotic prescribing patterns for children aged less than five years in the three major outpatient settings, Journal of Pediatrics. 2004; 144:200-205   40 Code to create design variables: survey years 2001 & earlier CPSUM=PSUM; CSTRATM = STRATM; IF CPSUM IN(1, 2, 3, 4) THEN DO; CPSUM = PROVIDER +100000; CSTRATM = (STRATM*100000) +(1000*(MOD(YEAR,100))) + (SUBFILE*100) + PROSTRAT; END; ELSE CSTRATM = (STRATM*100000); 41 SUDAAN version 8.0.2 example proc crosstab data=test1 design=WOR filetype=sas; Nest stratm psum subfile prostrat year provider dept su clinic/missunit; Totcnt poppsum _zero_ _zero_ _zero_ popprovm _zero_ popsum _zero_ popvism; Weight patwt; Tables sex*ager; run; 42 SUDAAN version 8.0.2 example proc crosstab data=test1 filetype=sas; Nest stratm psum ; Weight patwt; Tables sex*ager; run; 43 STATA version 8. example Use http:// ***/test1 svyset [pweight=patwt], strata(cstratm) psu(cpsum) svytab sex ager svymean age 44 SAS version 9.1 example proc surveyfreq data=test1; tables sex*ager; strata cstratm; cluster cpsum; weight patwt; run; 45 Some considerations: SUDAAN vs. SAS Proc Surveymeans SUDAAN •design variables=cstratm, cpsum (1-stage design) •nest=cstratm, cpsum PROC Surveymeans •design variables=cstratm, cpsum (1-stage design) •strata cstratm •cluster cpsum •Sort by design variables •Weight data: Patwt •Sort not needed •Weight data: Patwt •Subgroup=identify categorical variables •Tables=analysis variables •Class=identify categorical variables •Var=analysis variables 46 If nothing else, remember…The Public Use Data File Documentation is YOUR FRIEND!  Each booklet includes: – A description of the survey – Record format – Marginal data (summaries) – Various definitions – Reason for Visit classification codes – Medication & generic names – Therapeutic classes 47 Other Public Domain Data       CDC WONDER -- http://wonder.cdc.gov/ National Center for Health Statistics -http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/ National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) -http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nhanes.htm National Health Interview Survey (NHIS) -http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nhis.htm National Survey of Family Growth (NSFG) -http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nsfg.htm Census -- http://www.census.gov/ 48 Other Public Domain Data (cont.)  Dept. of Health, TN http://hitspot.state.tn.us/hitspot/hit/main/ SPOT/frames/SPOT/index.htm 49 Thanks Natasha Halasha  Susan Schappert - National Center for Health Statistics  Linda McCaig & David Woodwell National Center for Health Statistics  50 Questions? 51

Related docs
Other docs by J Smith
17_Top_250_Medications
Views: 239  |  Downloads: 3
07_Family_Practice
Views: 164  |  Downloads: 0
06_Pain_Management
Views: 228  |  Downloads: 2
03_Occupational_Medicine
Views: 183  |  Downloads: 0
05_Orthopedics
Views: 169  |  Downloads: 1
Lincoln V. Brown Schools[1]
Views: 240  |  Downloads: 0
8830_ug
Views: 225  |  Downloads: 0
BE ADVISED[1]
Views: 137  |  Downloads: 0
Pros and Cons of a ASC[1]
Views: 267  |  Downloads: 1
Craddock memo
Views: 126  |  Downloads: 0
2007_Incident to services[1]
Views: 141  |  Downloads: 1
National Pain Awareness
Views: 130  |  Downloads: 1
Why is chronic pain so difficult to treat[1]
Views: 145  |  Downloads: 3
Why is chronic pain so difficult to treat
Views: 184  |  Downloads: 6