Literature DB >> 15755946

The unintended consequences of publicly reporting quality information.

Rachel M Werner1, David A Asch.   

Abstract

Health care report cards publicly report information about physician, hospital, and health plan quality in an attempt to improve that quality. Reporting quality information publicly is presumed to motivate quality improvement through 2 main mechanisms. First, public quality information allows patients, referring physicians, and health care purchasers to preferentially select high-quality physicians. Second, public report cards may motivate physicians to compete on quality and, by providing feedback and by identifying areas for quality improvement initiatives, help physicians to do so. Despite these plausible mechanisms of quality improvement, the value of publicly reporting quality information is largely undemonstrated and public reporting may have unintended and negative consequences on health care. These unintended consequences include causing physicians to avoid sick patients in an attempt to improve their quality ranking, encouraging physicians to achieve "target rates" for health care interventions even when it may be inappropriate among some patients, and discounting patient preferences and clinical judgment. Public reporting of quality information promotes a spirit of openness that may be valuable for enhancing trust of the health professions, but its ability to improve health remains undemonstrated, and public reporting may inadvertently reduce, rather than improve, quality. Given these limitations, it may be necessary to reassess the role of public quality reporting in quality improvement.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Health Care and Public Health

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 15755946     DOI: 10.1001/jama.293.10.1239

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  JAMA        ISSN: 0098-7484            Impact factor:   56.272


  150 in total

Review 1.  Public release of performance data in changing the behaviour of healthcare consumers, professionals or organisations.

Authors:  Nicole A B M Ketelaar; Marjan J Faber; Signe Flottorp; Liv Helen Rygh; Katherine H O Deane; Martin P Eccles
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2011-11-09

2.  From simply inaccurate to complex and inaccurate: complexity in standards-based quality measures.

Authors:  David A Dorr; Aaron M Cohen; Marsha Pierre-Jacques Williams; John Hurdle
Journal:  AMIA Annu Symp Proc       Date:  2011-10-22

3.  California hospitals response to state and federal policies related to health care-associated infections.

Authors:  Patricia W Stone; Monika Pogorzelska; Denise Graham; Haomiao Jia; Mayuko Uchida; Elaine L Larson
Journal:  Policy Polit Nurs Pract       Date:  2011-05

4.  Implications of Internet availability of genomic information for public health practice.

Authors:  B W Hesse; N K Arora; M J Khoury
Journal:  Public Health Genomics       Date:  2012-04-04       Impact factor: 2.000

5.  Public reporting of cost and quality information in orthopaedics.

Authors:  Youssra Marjoua; Craig A Butler; Kevin J Bozic
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2012-04       Impact factor: 4.176

6.  Public reporting of nursing home quality of care: lessons from the United States experience for canadian policy discussion.

Authors:  Alison M Hutchinson; Kellie Draper; Anne E Sales
Journal:  Healthc Policy       Date:  2009-11

7.  Trends in Medicare Part D Medication Therapy Management Eligibility Criteria.

Authors:  Junling Wang; Ya-Chen Tina Shih; Yolanda Qin; Theo Young; Zachary Thomas; Christina A Spivey; David K Solomon; Marie Chisholm-Burns
Journal:  Am Health Drug Benefits       Date:  2015 Jul-Aug

8.  Variation in do-not-resuscitate orders for patients with ischemic stroke: implications for national hospital comparisons.

Authors:  Adam G Kelly; Darin B Zahuranec; Robert G Holloway; Lewis B Morgenstern; James F Burke
Journal:  Stroke       Date:  2014-02-12       Impact factor: 7.914

9.  Evaluation of centers of excellence program for knee and hip replacement.

Authors:  Ateev Mehrotra; Elizabeth M Sloss; Peter S Hussey; John L Adams; Susan Lovejoy; Nelson F Soohoo
Journal:  Med Care       Date:  2013-01       Impact factor: 2.983

10.  Selecting high priority quality measures for breast cancer quality improvement.

Authors:  Michael J Hassett; Melissa E Hughes; Joyce C Niland; Rebecca Ottesen; Stephen B Edge; Michael A Bookman; Robert W Carlson; Richard L Theriault; Jane C Weeks
Journal:  Med Care       Date:  2008-08       Impact factor: 2.983

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.