This information is for reference purposes only. It was current when produced and may now be outdated. Archive material is no longer maintained, and some links may not work. Persons with disabilities having difficulty accessing this information should contact us at: https://info.ahrq.gov. Let us know the nature of the problem, the Web address of what you want, and your contact information.
Please go to www.ahrq.gov for current information.
Results
- Cross-section and pre-post conversion comparisons showed that critical access hospital (CAH) had better performance of patient safety than rural PPS hospitals.
- The odds ratios of poor performance in CAHs compared to rural PPS hospitals are 0.30 (CI: 0.14-0.64) for PSI-6, 0.29 (CI: 0.15-0.56) for PSI-7, 0.40 (CI: 0.24-0.67) for PSI-15, and 0.49 (CI: 0.31-0.80) for composite score of 4 PSIs. CAH conversion had no significant impact on the observed rates of foreign body left during procedure.
- Moving average CAH indicator had larger effects than binary CAH scale.
- Sensitivity analyses using tobit models consistent results
- Findings were robust among sensitivity analyses using different samples and different methods
Previous Slide Contents Next Slide 
5600 Fishers Lane Rockville, MD 20857