Literature DB >> 16923433

Public versus private institutional performance reporting: what is mandatory for quality improvement?

Veena Guru1, Stephen E Fremes, C David Naylor, Peter C Austin, Fiona M Shrive, William A Ghali, Jack V Tu.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: In the past 11 years, Ontario has generated institution-level performance report cards on outcomes of coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery. The objective of this study was to evaluate the differences in patient characteristics and outcomes observed during the transition from no reporting to confidential, and ultimately public performance report cards for CABG surgery in a public health system.
METHODS: We used clinical and administrative data to assess crude, expected, and risk-adjusted 30-day mortality rates after isolated CABG surgery in Ontario for 67693 patients from September 1, 1991, to March 31, 2002. Confidence intervals on relative mortality reductions were determined by bootstrapping. We compared 30-day mortality trends to a control outcome (risk-adjusted 30-day all-cause readmission). We analyzed inhospital mortality trends for Ontario compared with the rest of Canada for the period from 1992 to 1998.
RESULTS: The risk-adjusted 30-day mortality rate decreased 29% (95% CI 21-39) from the era of no reporting (1991-1993) to confidential reporting (1994-1998). There was no further decrease with public reporting (1999-2001). The control outcome of 30-day readmission did not decrease across reporting eras. Inhospital mortality fell significantly faster in Ontario during the period of confidential reporting than in other parts of Canada.
CONCLUSION: Ontario CABG mortality outcomes improved sharply after provider results were confidentially disclosed at an institutional level. No such changes were seen for nondisclosed outcomes or regions outside Ontario. Further public reporting of outcomes had no discernible impact on performance. These results are consistent with the hypothesis that confidential disclosure of outcomes was sufficient to accelerate quality improvement in a public system with little competition for patients between hospitals.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2006        PMID: 16923433     DOI: 10.1016/j.ahj.2005.10.026

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am Heart J        ISSN: 0002-8703            Impact factor:   4.749


  8 in total

Review 1.  Hospital mortality: when failure is not a good measure of success.

Authors:  Kaveh G Shojania; Alan J Forster
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  2008-07-15       Impact factor: 8.262

2.  Publicly reported provider outcomes: the concerns of cardiac surgeons in a single-payer system.

Authors:  Veena Guru; C David Naylor; Stephen E Fremes; Kevin Teoh; Jack V Tu
Journal:  Can J Cardiol       Date:  2009-01       Impact factor: 5.223

3.  Improving the quality of health care in Canada.

Authors:  Irfan A Dhalla; Joshua Tepper
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  2018-10-01       Impact factor: 8.262

Review 4.  Risk assessment methods for cardiac surgery and intervention.

Authors:  Nassir M Thalji; Rakesh M Suri; Kevin L Greason; Hartzell V Schaff
Journal:  Nat Rev Cardiol       Date:  2014-09-23       Impact factor: 32.419

Review 5.  The effect of consultant outcome publication on surgeon behaviour: a systematic review and narrative synthesis.

Authors:  M P Williams; V Modgil; M J Drake; F Keeley
Journal:  Ann R Coll Surg Engl       Date:  2018-07       Impact factor: 1.891

6.  The Impact of Public Performance Reporting on Market Share, Mortality, and Patient Mix Outcomes Associated With Coronary Artery Bypass Grafts and Percutaneous Coronary Interventions (2000-2016): A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Authors:  David Dunt; Khic-Houy Prang; Hana Sabanovic; Margaret Kelaher
Journal:  Med Care       Date:  2018-11       Impact factor: 2.983

7.  Functionality and feedback: a protocol for a realist synthesis of the collation, interpretation and utilisation of PROMs data to improve patient care.

Authors:  Joanne Greenhalgh; Ray Pawson; Judy Wright; Nick Black; Jose Maria Valderas; David Meads; Elizabeth Gibbons; Laurence Wood; Charlotte Wood; Chris Mills; Sonia Dalkin
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2014-07-22       Impact factor: 2.692

Review 8.  The impact of Public Reporting on clinical outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Paolo Campanella; Vladimir Vukovic; Paolo Parente; Adela Sulejmani; Walter Ricciardi; Maria Lucia Specchia
Journal:  BMC Health Serv Res       Date:  2016-07-22       Impact factor: 2.655

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.