In two separate studies, researchers utilized Medicare billing data from hospitals and physician offices to search for billing codes that suggested the patient may have had a surgical infection. If a bill suggested an infection, the researchers next reviewed medical records to determine if the patients indeed had an infection.
In one of the studies, they found 1.8-4.7 times as many infections through this process than traditional hospital surveillance.
Researchers suggested the different ways hospitals conduct surveillance for surgical infections, including post-discharge surveillance, may contribute to the miscalculations. Some hospitals, for instance, contact patients directly while others collect information from surgeons after discharge. Researchers added that it’s not uncommon for a patient to have surgery at one hospital, develop an infection after being discharged and then have the infection treated at another healthcare facility.
Authors of the study suggest their method of identifying infections may help providers determine a truer volume of surgical site infections acquired at their respective facilities.
Related Articles on Surgical Site Infections:
South Carolina Lists Infection Rates by Hospital Size
Superficial Surgical Site Infection a Reliable Measure of Quality
Colorado Releases Hospital Infection Rate Report
At the Becker's 11th Annual IT + Revenue Cycle Conference: The Future of AI & Digital Health, taking place September 14–17 in Chicago, healthcare executives and digital leaders from across the country will come together to explore how AI, interoperability, cybersecurity, and revenue cycle innovation are transforming care delivery, strengthening financial performance, and driving the next era of digital health. Apply for complimentary registration now.
