Literature DB >> 21866496

[Public reporting in health care: the impact of publicly reported quality data on patient steerage].

M Emmert1, R Gemza, O Schöffski, S Sohn.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Public reporting (PR) has been gaining more weight as a mechanism for patient steerage. According to the theory of PR, patients use information about the quality of health care providers before making decisions and selecting health-care providers. This paper contributes further knowledge on the effectiveness of PR and identifies critical success factors. These should be taken into account when implementing PR in the German health care system.
METHODOLOGY: The peer-reviewed English, Spanish, and German language literature was searched in the following five databases: The Cochrane Library, Medline (via PubMed), ISI Web of Knowledge, EconLit, and PsycINFO (since 2005). In addition, reference lists of the included studies and reviews were screened in order to identify previously published studies.
RESULTS: In total, 21 studies were identified regarding the impact of 12 different PR instruments on patient steerage. An impact could be demonstrated in 9 studies, 7 studies showed mixed results, while 5 studies could not show any effect on patient steerage. 20 studies were carried out in the US environment, 1 study in Germany. The most researched instrument is the New York State Cardiac Surgery Reporting System (N=8).
CONCLUSION: PR can be effective in steering patients when seeking a health-care provider, especially for elective procedures. To be successful, information provided must be reliable, easily understandable, should further represent real news, and be disseminated widely. Besides this, it has to be applicable and modifiable according to individual preferences. © Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart · New York.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21866496     DOI: 10.1055/s-0031-1285857

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Gesundheitswesen        ISSN: 0941-3790


  6 in total

1.  Patients' Awareness, Usage and Impact of Hospital Report Cards in the US.

Authors:  Martin Emmert; Mark Schlesinger
Journal:  Patient       Date:  2017-12       Impact factor: 3.883

2.  Information presentation features and comprehensibility of hospital report cards: design analysis and online survey among users.

Authors:  Uwe Sander; Martin Emmert; Jochen Dickel; Nina Meszmer; Benjamin Kolb
Journal:  J Med Internet Res       Date:  2015-03-16       Impact factor: 5.428

Review 3.  Eight questions about physician-rating websites: a systematic review.

Authors:  Martin Emmert; Uwe Sander; Frank Pisch
Journal:  J Med Internet Res       Date:  2013-02-01       Impact factor: 5.428

4.  An analysis of online evaluations on a physician rating website: evidence from a German public reporting instrument.

Authors:  Martin Emmert; Florian Meier
Journal:  J Med Internet Res       Date:  2013-08-06       Impact factor: 5.428

5.  Physician choice making and characteristics associated with using physician-rating websites: cross-sectional study.

Authors:  Martin Emmert; Florian Meier; Frank Pisch; Uwe Sander
Journal:  J Med Internet Res       Date:  2013-08-28       Impact factor: 5.428

6.  [Attitudes to publication of quality testing reports in nursing homes].

Authors:  Andrea König; Rüdiger Erling; Bernd Reuschenbach
Journal:  Z Gerontol Geriatr       Date:  2020-07-31       Impact factor: 1.281

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.