[Does a higher coronary artery bypass graft surgery volume always have a low in-hospital mortality rate in Korea?].

Objectives: To propose a risk-adjustment model with using insurance claims data and to analyze whether or not the outcomes of non-emergent and isolated coronary artery bypass graft surgery (CABG) differed between the low- and high-volume hospitals for the patients who are at different levels of surgical risk.

Methods: This is a cross-sectional study that used the 2002 data of the national health insurance claims. The study data set included the patient level data as well as all the ICD-10 diagnosis and procedure codes that were recorded in the claims. The patient's biological, admission and comorbidity information were used in the risk-adjustment model. The risk factors were adjusted with the logistic regression model. The subjects were classified into five groups based on the predicted surgical risk: minimal (<0.5%), low (0.5% to 2%), moderate (2% to 5%), high (5% to 20%), and severe (=20%). The differences between the low- and high-volume hospitals were assessed in each of the five risk groups.

Results: The final risk-adjustment model consisted of ten risk factors and these factors were found to have statistically significant effects on patient mortality. The C-statistic (0.83) and Hosmer-Lemeshow test (x2=6.92, p=0.55) showed that the model's performance was good. A total of 30 low-volume hospitals (971 patients) and 4 high-volume hospitals (1,087 patients) were identified. Significant differences for the in-hospital mortality were found between the low- and high-volume hospitals for the high (21.6% vs. 7.2%, p=0.00) and severe (44.4% vs. 11.8%, p=0.00) risk patient groups.

Conclusions: Good model performance showed that insurance claims data can be used for comparing hospital mortality after adjusting for the patients' risk. Negative correlation was existed between surgery volume and in-hospital mortality. However, only patients in high and severe risk groups had such a relationship.