Health -
News Sections
Experts hope report helps cut hospital mortality
CTV News Video
Watch: See all Videos in the Player
CTV.ca News Staff
Date: Thu. Nov. 29 2007 9:10 PM ET
Hospitals in Newfoundland and Labrador and Nova Scotia have some of the highest death rates in the country, finds a new report that, for the first time, compares mortality rates at hospitals across the country.
Saskatchewan, on the other hand, has some of the lowest hospital death rates, according to the report released Thursday by the Canadian Institute for Health Information.
The information comes from a calculation tool being used for the first time in Canada, called the Hospital Standardized Mortality Ratio (HSMR). The tool compares the death rates of patients treated at 92 larger acute care hospitals and 42 health regions in Canada, outside Quebec.
(Quebec results are not available due to historical differences in hospital data collection. And seven of the larger hospitals chose not to have their results published this year, because of concerns over their own data collection methods.)
The number of deaths in a hospital or region are compared with the average Canadian experience, after adjusting for several factors, such as the age of the patient, their health status upon admission and their gender.
An HSMR of 100 is the overall average rate. So a hospital or region with an overall HSMR greater than 100 has a mortality rate that is higher than the average; if it's less than 100, that suggests that its mortality rate is lower than the average.
The Cape Breton Healthcare Complex, in Nova Scotia, for example, had the worst score of any hospital that chose to have its results included on the list, with an overall HSMR of 137 -- though its ratio has dropped from 143 in 2004-05, to 129 in 2006-07.
The Regina General Hospital in Saskatchewan had one of the best overall HSMR in Canada, at 71.
Other hospitals with poor scores were:
- Grand River Hospital, KW Health Centre, in Kitchener, Ont. HSMR: 130
- Scarborough Hospital General site, in Toronto, Ont. HSMR: 129
- St. Catharines General Niagara Health System, in St. Catharines, Ont. HSMR: 129
Other hospitals with good scores were:
- St. Mary's General Hospital, in Kitchener, Ont. HSMR: 81
- Thunder Bay Regional Health Sciences Centre, in Thunder Bay, Ont. HSMR: 81
- Moncton Hospital, in Moncton, N.B. HSMR: 83
On a region-by-region basis -- which included all hospitals in a jurisdiction, not just the larger health centres -- the five hospitals of the Cape Breton District Health Authority reported the poorest score with the highest overall HSMRs.
The nine hospitals in the Newfoundland and Labrador Central Regional Integrated Health Authority also reported a high average mortality rate.
The seven hospitals in Saskatchewan's Sunrise Regional Health Authority had some of the best scores. Second best was the province's Regina Qu'Appelle Regional Health Authority.
Aim is to see death rates fall
The hope is that the data from this report can be used to cut the number of preventable "adverse events" -- those hospital errors that can sometimes lead to unexpected death.
A recent study in 2004 found that 7.5 per cent of adult medical or surgical patients had adverse events in hospital -- about one-third of which were deemed preventable.
Most patients recover from these errors, but each year, between 9,250 and 23,750 Canadian adults experience a "preventable" adverse event in hospital and later die, according to the study, which was funded in part by CIHI.
Phil Hassen, CEO of the Canadian Patient Safety Institute says the HSMR will be an important new measure of patient outcomes.
"What we want to do is have hospitals pay attention to this and begin to do work to reduce the number of... unnecessary deaths," he told CTV. "HSMR is an indicator that will focus people's attention This will then allow us to see a reduction in lives lost that should not have happened."
Already, the overall average HSMR in Canada has fallen by six per cent since the data began to be collected three years ago. This translates to just over 2,500 fewer in-hospital deaths.
But trends vary by patient group. For example, death rates for patients with heart attacks fell faster than those for patients with pneumonia. The five illnesses that had the highest numbers of deaths were:
- heart attack,
- heart failure,
- pneumonia,
- chronic obstructive pulmonary disease
- septicemia (whole body infection)
Those patients who had higher odds of dying in hospital were:
- Men
- Those with chronic health problems (such as kidney disease or AIDS) in addition to their main diagnosis
- Those who came in as urgent/emergency admissions
These factors were all taken into account in calculating the results.
The HSMR is calculated based on the illness groups that account for 80 per cent of all deaths in acute care hospitals. The death rates are then adjusted for other factors that would affect mortality, such as advanced age, having multiple illnesses at once, and whether or not patients were transferred between hospitals.
The hospitals and health regions included in Thursday's report are already aware of how their facility or region compares to others across the country. Some have already begun to make changes.
For example, the Saskatoon Health Region has begun introducing rapid response teams to prevent deaths in patients who find themselves in trauma outside of intensive care settings. They are also adopting practices to prevent ventilator-associated pneumonia, to reduce medication problems and infections and to standardize wound and skin care.
Yet some hospitals have seen their numbers rise in the last three years. Windsor Regional Hospital has seen its HSMR go from 118 in 2004-05, to 109 the next year, to 133 in 2006-07.
The hospital chose not to have its results published in the report but did decide to hold its own news conference to explain what it says were mitigating factors that explain their numbers. The hospital says, for example, that its high death rate is become it often accepts transfers of the sickest patients across the region to its health centre.
Hospital CEO Martin Girash says the hospital is not content with its mortality rates and will strike a committee to review the numbers and will work to improve its score.
History of the HSMR
The HSMR has been used by hospitals in several countries throughout the world as part of efforts to track mortality rates over time and target areas for improvement.
Every country uses similar data and calculation methods, but each country's results are based on their own national mortality experience, not compared to one another.
The HSMR tool was developed by Sir Brian Jarman at the Imperial College in the United Kingdom. He says that since Britain started tracking its hospitals' death rates, numbers have fallen across the board.
"I think it's been very successful, because about 80 per cent of hospitals in England now use the data on a monthly basis," he told CTV News.
"You can pick out problems to do with mortality and monitor the changes you implement and then look at how you're getting on with that."
Hospitals can use the data to identify which departments of their hospitals have unusually high death rates compared to other hospitals' similar departments, he says. Hospitals can then begin to make changes by reviewing patient charts and organizing teams to review their hospital's clinical practices.
User Tools
Related Stories
Subscribe!
CTV.ca Blogs
Like us on Facebook
Stay connected to the latest health news while you're on Facebook with CTV MedNews
Related Websites
Most Popular
Most Viewed News Stories
Most Talked about Stories
If 5000 jobs can be so vital to the nation's economy, they should get what they ask for in bargaining. Simple.
Email


Comments are now closed for this story
CB anxious
said
RadiologyCrisisInCanada
said
1st.
I graduated in 2000 from a northern college. Back then it was a 3 year condensed format(24 months straight - no summers off or vacation), which is an adequate amount of education for someone in a largely technical role. The average age of a Medical Radiation Technologist at that time in Ontario was 48 years of age. I assume largely that Nurses are in the same situation - meaning that the majority of the workforce will be retiring in the next 15 years at most(I'm being generous).
So what is the government(Including our regulating bodies) doing to try to prepare the healthcare system to cope with losing the Majority of our Workforce? X-ray technologists in Ontario now need a 4 year bachelor's degree. That is their solution... This plan of "better educating" our workforce is going to produce real hardships in the years to come.
Think about it this way. I can go to school for 4 years and become an Engineer, Lawyer, Teacher, and many other professions with much better income potential than my current profession. So how is placing HUGE student debt loads combined with an extra 2 years out of the workforce going to attract people into my profession?
You think a 6 month waitlist for an MRI or a 6-10 week wait for an Ultrasound/CAT Scan is bad now? Give it a few more years, though I'm not sure you will like the result.
Greg
said
Mo
said
Todd
said
MO
said
Mark H.
said
lisa h
said
WANDA
said
We should be concerned. Could there be other reasons this may be happening???????
Expat Tony
said
the McNabs
said
Chris
said
Get over it,it is the facts of life.
Mo
said
Jim
said
MattFromKamloops
said
namely because of the much larger administration costs from having many different providers. The Canadian system needs a fix, but I would look to Scandinavian countries instead of the USA for a template to mimic.
Rodney
said
The US spends 30% of its federal budget on health care (Canada its closer to 60%). Take that 30% difference off my combined taxes (wife and me) and that means my family would have to find full coverage for about $300 per month. Not really possible for two kids and two adults. In the US, an ever-growing number of people get jobs that do not cover medical anymore. One in seven do not have coverage.
Under Darren's scenario, most everyone who works gets health care covered, and those who don't, get it free. No problem I guess. The US model is not sustainable. Darren is more concerned with US bashing than telling the truth.
Canada's health care could be better, but Canadians fear that once the profit motive enters the picture, as it does in the US, people will get less and health care providers (companies, not doctors) will cause the costs to escalate.
I'm certain there is a better way than always looking south to solve our problems.
Ed from Alberta
said
Socialism is killing us
said
Caper
said
In this case the report shows Cape Breton has one of the highest ratios of people dying in hospital. However, if you look at the actual report on the CIHI site, you will see references to the previous use of palliative care information which impacted the Cape Breton number.
Obviously more people die in Hospital in C.B. rather than at home, or in a nursing home.
If you look at the health status of the District, the rates of chronic illnesses, like heart and respiratory disease are often higher than the provincial and national averages and the population is getting older. I also understand that more people are receiving end of life care in hospitals in Cape Breton than any other place in Canada. This shows the need for Palliative Care and in fact, Cape Breton's Palliative Care service is building a new unit.
Leo Fleming
said
And England, like most European countries, has a dual public/private system. It is far quicker to receive treatment in the UK than in any Canadian province.
One of the main problems that I see in Canada is that the performace of health care professionals goes both unrewarded and unpunished. Unions prevent incompetent nurses (and there ar eplenty) from being fired. And the money that is wasted in beuracracy pales in comparison to any other country.
bobmac
said
Overall, if you have healthcare in the US, it is second to none, if not Canada is the place to be.
Darren
said
In the US, pretty much anybody that works has health care. Most of it is payed for by the employer. People on welfare still get health care, as every major city is required to have a public hospital; the fact that they are already on welfare does not impact them financially with medical bills, as most get waved.
I have spent a significant amount of time in both countries, and the US health care system is FAR superior to the CDN one. There are no wait times. They actually will try to find out what's wrong with you (unlike in Canada where their attitude is "come back when you are visibly dying"). It is not expensive, as the CDN propoganda will have you believe, and to anybody in Canada that is not on welfare you are actually paying significantly more in taxes to cover the health care of EVERYONE ELSE than you would have if you even paid for your own insurance in the US.
RTF article
said
Steve
said
I would take the Canadian system any day over every person for them self.
Canadians take our system for granded. In the States you need to get pre-approved for any procedure from your insurance company. The Insurance company can just wait till you die instead of paying for expensive procedures.
Terri
said
Rob P
said
What I am saying is that Newfoundland has some really talented doctors and nurses. The reason so many people die is because we are an ageing population due to out migration of young people for work. Add that to the fact that you have people who have to literally get air lifted from their remote towns such as Southern Labrador to the nearest hospital in St. Anthony NFLD (which can take upwards of 3-4 hours) your death rate will significantly rise.
If someone living in Southern Labrador has a massive heart attack, stroke, or whatever, by the time they get to the hospital they are good as dead. These people choose to live there because it is their home, they know the risks they take on living in such remote places but it is well worth it as their quality of life there is much better than any city goers I know.
Cross
said
And here’s to you folk who have never lived in another country other than Canada…
From experience…you don’t know how lucky you are…that’s another “given”…!!
Cross
IAN
said
Zach
said
Kris
said
You came close to dying and the service was "beyond bad"? Bad service to me, when pertaining to a hospital, is whether I died or not. Seeing as how you are able to type tht comment, I'd say the quality of care you received was quite good.
And as for Socialism is killing us comment... get real. Socialism is saving us. I'd rather have to put up with pain for a week, than have to put up with the interest on the loan I would undoubtedly have to take out to receive care in the US... all for the sake of a week, or a month tops.
Mau
said
What a ridiculous statement. How is it better in the US when your health care depends on your monetary value?
I prefer not so great care as opposed to unaffordable creating unattainable health care. The death rate is higher in the US. Only the wealthy have health care there.
IAN
said
Grant
said
Nova Scotia was doing its best to make access to services difficult but NL has lost the cream of its crop to higher paying provinces.
In all sectors, the province relies on those workers whose fear of leaving is greater than the desire to be paid a competitive wage.
Do the best workers stay at the lowest rates of pay in the country, or is it just the best of whoever is left?
MH from Ontario
said
Al
said
Socialism is killing us
said
hanna
said