Though a comparison between manual and automated methods for identifying potentially preventable readmissions in a large healthcare system found that the software identified many more readmissions as potentially preventable, the study concluded that "concordance between methods was not high enough to replace manual review with automated classification as the primary method of identifying preventable 30-day, all-cause readmission for quality improvement purposes." 

Researchers manually reviewed 459 30-day, all-cause readmissions at 18 Kaiser Permanente Northern California hospitals, determining potential preventability through a four-step manual review process. They also reassessed the same readmissions with 3M’s Potentially Preventable Readmission (PPR) software, and examined between-method agreement and the specificity and sensitivity of the PPR software using manual review as the reference.

Register or login for access to this item and much more

All Health Data Management content is archived after seven days.

Community members receive:
  • All recent and archived articles
  • Conference offers and updates
  • A full menu of enewsletter options
  • Web seminars, white papers, ebooks

Don't have an account? Register for Free Unlimited Access