Literature DB >> 17549759

Conflicting measures of hospital quality: ratings from "Hospital Compare" versus "Best Hospitals".

Lakshmi K Halasyamani1, Matthew M Davis.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: In April 2005 the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services launched "Hospital Compare," the first government-sponsored hospital quality scorecard. We compared the ranking of U.S. News and World Report's "Best Hospitals" with Hospital Compare performance ratings.
METHODS: We examined Hospital Compare scores for core measures related to care for acute myocardial infarction (AMI), congestive heart failure (CHF), and community-acquired pneumonia (CAP). We calculated composite scores for the disease-specific sets of core measures and a composite combined score for the 14 core measures (across 3 diseases) and determined national score quartile cut points for each set. We then characterized the quartile distribution of Hospital Compare scores for the Best Hospitals for care of cardiac conditions and respiratory disorders in each year, as well as for the Best Hospital "Honor Roll" institutions.
RESULTS: AMI scores were available for 2165 hospitals, CHF scores for 3130, and CAP scores for 3462. In both 2004 and 2005, fewer than 50% of the Best Hospitals for cardiac care rated in the top quartile of Hospital Compare scores for AMI and CHF. Among the Best Hospitals for care of respiratory disorders, fewer than 15% scored in the top Hospital Compare quartile for CAP. Among Honor Roll institutions, only 5 (of 14 hospitals in 2004; of 16 in 2005) ranked in the top quartile for the combined core measure score.
CONCLUSIONS: Hospital Compare scores are frequently discordant with Best Hospital rankings, which is likely attributable to the markedly different methods each rating approach employs. Such discordance between major quality rating systems paints a conflicting picture of institutional performance for the public to interpret. (c) 2007 Society of Hospital Medicine.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17549759     DOI: 10.1002/jhm.176

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Hosp Med        ISSN: 1553-5592            Impact factor:   2.960


  13 in total

1.  Academic ranking score: a publication-based reproducible metric of thought leadership in urology.

Authors:  Alexander Kutikov; Boris Rozenfeld; Brian L Egleston; Mohit Sirohi; Raymond W Hwang; Robert G Uzzo
Journal:  Eur Urol       Date:  2011-10-25       Impact factor: 20.096

2.  Identifying a quality improvement project.

Authors:  Lakshmi Katakam; Gautham K Suresh
Journal:  J Perinatol       Date:  2017-08-24       Impact factor: 2.521

3.  Formal selection of measures for a composite index of NICU quality of care: Baby-MONITOR.

Authors:  J Profit; J B Gould; J A F Zupancic; A R Stark; K M Wall; M A Kowalkowski; M Mei; K Pietz; E J Thomas; L A Petersen
Journal:  J Perinatol       Date:  2011-02-24       Impact factor: 2.521

4.  [Pareto optimal communication of the medical qualities of practicing ophthalmologists: a new option for patient information?].

Authors:  C Thielscher; S Rödder; M Schütte
Journal:  Ophthalmologe       Date:  2009-09       Impact factor: 1.059

5.  Impact of socioeconomic status measures on hospital profiling in New York City.

Authors:  Alexander B Blum; Natalia N Egorova; Eugene A Sosunov; Annetine C Gelijns; Erin DuPree; Alan J Moskowitz; Alex D Federman; Deborah D Ascheim; Salomeh Keyhani
Journal:  Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes       Date:  2014-05-13

6.  Rankings versus reality in pancreatic cancer surgery: a real-world comparison.

Authors:  Zeling Chau; James K West; Zheng Zhou; Theodore McDade; Jillian K Smith; Sing-Chau Ng; Tara S Kent; Mark P Callery; A James Moser; Jennifer F Tseng
Journal:  HPB (Oxford)       Date:  2013-11-07       Impact factor: 3.647

7.  Concordance and robustness of quality indicator sets for hospitals: an analysis of routine data.

Authors:  Jürgen Stausberg; Axel Halim; Robert Färber
Journal:  BMC Health Serv Res       Date:  2011-05-18       Impact factor: 2.655

8.  Composite measures of quality of health care: Evidence mapping of methodology and reporting.

Authors:  Pinar Kara; Jan Brink Valentin; Jan Mainz; Søren Paaske Johnsen
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2022-05-12       Impact factor: 3.240

9.  Follow-up analysis of federal process of care data reported from three acute care hospitals in rural Appalachia.

Authors:  E Scott Sills; Liubomir Chiriac; Denis Vaughan; Christopher A Jones; Shala A Salem
Journal:  Clinicoecon Outcomes Res       Date:  2013-03-27

10.  The Association between eHealth Capabilities and the Quality and Safety of Health Care in the Netherlands: Comparison of HIMSS Analytics EMRAM data with Elsevier's 'The Best Hospitals' data.

Authors:  Rube van Poelgeest; Jan-Peter Heida; Lorren Pettit; Rob J de Leeuw; Guus Schrijvers
Journal:  J Med Syst       Date:  2015-08-05       Impact factor: 4.460

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.