The Adverse Outcome Index: Putting Quality into an Outcome Measure

Fouad Atallah, Peter S. Bernstein, Danilo Acosta Diaz, Howard Minkoff

Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

1 Citation (Scopus)

Abstract

The Adverse Outcome Index, originally designed to provide an objective inventory of adverse outcomes, is often promoted as a tool for assessing the quality of inpatient obstetric care. Although the Adverse Outcome Index is well described, and its outcomes are easy to collect, it has notable drawbacks such as "paradoxical measures" (eg, blood transfusions are counted as adverse measures even when they are used appropriately) and the dominance of certain measures within the Adverse Outcome Index that can drive scores (eg, neonatal intensive care unit admissions). In this article, we argue that in addition to the limitations noted, the Adverse Outcome Index, although providing a reasonable measure of inpatient obstetric acuity, fails to be a reliable measure of quality. This is particularly important because many organizations are seeking quality measures and the Adverse Outcome Index may become a candidate tool. We believe that introducing an adjudication process to the Adverse Outcome Index would greatly enhance its role as a quality indicator. Until newly proposed quality measures are perfected and adopted, a quality-adjusted Adverse Outcome Index will allow this widely used measure to provide a more reliable determination of those adverse events potentially amenable to performance improvement.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)750-753
Number of pages4
JournalObstetrics and Gynecology
Volume132
Issue number3
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 1 2018

Fingerprint

Obstetrics
Inpatients
Outcome Assessment (Health Care)
Neonatal Intensive Care Units
Blood Transfusion
Equipment and Supplies

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Obstetrics and Gynecology

Cite this

The Adverse Outcome Index : Putting Quality into an Outcome Measure. / Atallah, Fouad; Bernstein, Peter S.; Diaz, Danilo Acosta; Minkoff, Howard.

In: Obstetrics and Gynecology, Vol. 132, No. 3, 01.01.2018, p. 750-753.

Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

Atallah, Fouad ; Bernstein, Peter S. ; Diaz, Danilo Acosta ; Minkoff, Howard. / The Adverse Outcome Index : Putting Quality into an Outcome Measure. In: Obstetrics and Gynecology. 2018 ; Vol. 132, No. 3. pp. 750-753.
@article{c18b9f7e638f4e0b945dc4da1c80e8ab,
title = "The Adverse Outcome Index: Putting Quality into an Outcome Measure",
abstract = "The Adverse Outcome Index, originally designed to provide an objective inventory of adverse outcomes, is often promoted as a tool for assessing the quality of inpatient obstetric care. Although the Adverse Outcome Index is well described, and its outcomes are easy to collect, it has notable drawbacks such as {"}paradoxical measures{"} (eg, blood transfusions are counted as adverse measures even when they are used appropriately) and the dominance of certain measures within the Adverse Outcome Index that can drive scores (eg, neonatal intensive care unit admissions). In this article, we argue that in addition to the limitations noted, the Adverse Outcome Index, although providing a reasonable measure of inpatient obstetric acuity, fails to be a reliable measure of quality. This is particularly important because many organizations are seeking quality measures and the Adverse Outcome Index may become a candidate tool. We believe that introducing an adjudication process to the Adverse Outcome Index would greatly enhance its role as a quality indicator. Until newly proposed quality measures are perfected and adopted, a quality-adjusted Adverse Outcome Index will allow this widely used measure to provide a more reliable determination of those adverse events potentially amenable to performance improvement.",
author = "Fouad Atallah and Bernstein, {Peter S.} and Diaz, {Danilo Acosta} and Howard Minkoff",
year = "2018",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1097/AOG.0000000000002791",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "132",
pages = "750--753",
journal = "Obstetrics and Gynecology",
issn = "0029-7844",
publisher = "Lippincott Williams and Wilkins",
number = "3",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - The Adverse Outcome Index

T2 - Putting Quality into an Outcome Measure

AU - Atallah, Fouad

AU - Bernstein, Peter S.

AU - Diaz, Danilo Acosta

AU - Minkoff, Howard

PY - 2018/1/1

Y1 - 2018/1/1

N2 - The Adverse Outcome Index, originally designed to provide an objective inventory of adverse outcomes, is often promoted as a tool for assessing the quality of inpatient obstetric care. Although the Adverse Outcome Index is well described, and its outcomes are easy to collect, it has notable drawbacks such as "paradoxical measures" (eg, blood transfusions are counted as adverse measures even when they are used appropriately) and the dominance of certain measures within the Adverse Outcome Index that can drive scores (eg, neonatal intensive care unit admissions). In this article, we argue that in addition to the limitations noted, the Adverse Outcome Index, although providing a reasonable measure of inpatient obstetric acuity, fails to be a reliable measure of quality. This is particularly important because many organizations are seeking quality measures and the Adverse Outcome Index may become a candidate tool. We believe that introducing an adjudication process to the Adverse Outcome Index would greatly enhance its role as a quality indicator. Until newly proposed quality measures are perfected and adopted, a quality-adjusted Adverse Outcome Index will allow this widely used measure to provide a more reliable determination of those adverse events potentially amenable to performance improvement.

AB - The Adverse Outcome Index, originally designed to provide an objective inventory of adverse outcomes, is often promoted as a tool for assessing the quality of inpatient obstetric care. Although the Adverse Outcome Index is well described, and its outcomes are easy to collect, it has notable drawbacks such as "paradoxical measures" (eg, blood transfusions are counted as adverse measures even when they are used appropriately) and the dominance of certain measures within the Adverse Outcome Index that can drive scores (eg, neonatal intensive care unit admissions). In this article, we argue that in addition to the limitations noted, the Adverse Outcome Index, although providing a reasonable measure of inpatient obstetric acuity, fails to be a reliable measure of quality. This is particularly important because many organizations are seeking quality measures and the Adverse Outcome Index may become a candidate tool. We believe that introducing an adjudication process to the Adverse Outcome Index would greatly enhance its role as a quality indicator. Until newly proposed quality measures are perfected and adopted, a quality-adjusted Adverse Outcome Index will allow this widely used measure to provide a more reliable determination of those adverse events potentially amenable to performance improvement.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85056493789&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85056493789&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1097/AOG.0000000000002791

DO - 10.1097/AOG.0000000000002791

M3 - Review article

C2 - 30095779

AN - SCOPUS:85056493789

VL - 132

SP - 750

EP - 753

JO - Obstetrics and Gynecology

JF - Obstetrics and Gynecology

SN - 0029-7844

IS - 3

ER -