You are here

Article Text

Article menu
Download PDFPDF
Correspondence Response
Response to: ‘Recast the debate about preventable readmissions’ by Sutherland et al
  1. Christine Soong1,2,
  2. Chaim Bell1,2
  1. 1Division of General Internal Medicine, Mount Sinai Hospital, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
  2. 2Institute of Health Policy Management and Evaluation, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
  1. Correspondence to Dr Christine Soong, GIM, Mount Sinai Hospital, 428-600 University Avenue, Toronto, Ontario, Canada M5G 1X5; christine.soong{at}utoronto.ca

https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjqs-2015-005126

Statistics from Altmetric.com

    Request Permissions

    If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

    We thank Dr Sutherland1 for drawing our attention to the extensive work that has been done in developing a 30-day risk-standardised readmission ratio (RSRR) in New South Wales, Australia. We agree that variations in these RSRR rates can serve as a useful screening tool to prompt organisations to better understand whether a problem exists and in which areas.

    First, we commend Dr Sutherland in the use of administrative and hospital databases to develop a risk-adjusted readmission measure.1 While …

    View Full Text

    Footnotes

    • Competing interests None declared.

    • Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; internally peer reviewed.

    Linked Articles

    • Correspondence
      Recast the debate about preventable readmissions
      Kim Sutherland Sadaf Marashi-Pour Huei-Yang (Tom) Chen Ann Morgan Jean-Frédéric Lévesque
      BMJ Quality & Safety 2016; 25 386-387 Published Online First: 04 Jan 2016. doi: 10.1136/bmjqs-2015-005132