Literature DB >> 2403602

Hospital leaders' opinions of the HCFA mortality data.

D M Berwick1, D L Wald.   

Abstract

The release of hospital-specific mortality data by the Health Care Financing Administration has stirred controversy about the adequacy of current case-mix adjustment models and about the wisdom in general of public release of outcome data. We surveyed a national sample of hospitals, stratified by measured mortality rate, in the 1987 Health Care Financing Administration data release to determine the reactions of hospital leaders to the data and to learn if hospitals with high mortality had different attitudes from those of hospitals with average or low mortality as measured by the Health Care Financing Administration. Seventy-eight percent (N = 195) responded. All hospitals, regardless of mortality rate, shared an extremely negative view of the accuracy, usefulness, and interpretability of the Health Care Financing Administration's mortality data. The lowest possible rating (poor) was given by 70% of the respondents on the question of usefulness of the data to the hospital, by 54% on accuracy of the data, and by 85% on usefulness of the data to consumers. Only 31% of the respondents said that they had used the data at all for internal purposes and 20% reported that the data release had caused problems for the hospital. Hospitals in the high-mortality group were more likely than others to report both use of the data and problems from its release. Publication of outcome data to encourage quality improvement may face severe and pervasive barriers in the attitudes and reactions of hospital leaders who are potential clients for such data.

Mesh:

Year:  1990        PMID: 2403602

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


  24 in total

1.  Improving quality in general practice: qualitative case study of barriers faced by health authorities.

Authors:  M N Marshall
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1999-07-17

2.  Learning from differences within the NHS. Clinical indicators should be used to learn, not to judge.

Authors:  A G Mulley
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1999-08-28

3.  Public disclosure of performance data: learning from the US experience.

Authors:  M N Marshall; P G Shekelle; S Leatherman; R H Brook
Journal:  Qual Health Care       Date:  2000-03

4.  Effects of environmental threats on the quality of care in acute care hospitals.

Authors:  K I Youn; T T Wan
Journal:  J Med Syst       Date:  2001-10       Impact factor: 4.460

5.  Measuring mental health outcomes with pre-post designs.

Authors:  E W Lambert; A Doucette; L Bickman
Journal:  J Behav Health Serv Res       Date:  2001-08       Impact factor: 1.505

Review 6.  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

7.  Factors that influence line managers' perceptions of hospital performance data.

Authors:  Liane Soberman Ginsburg
Journal:  Health Serv Res       Date:  2003-02       Impact factor: 3.402

8.  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

9.  External monitoring of quality of health care in the United States.

Authors:  N J Wareham
Journal:  Qual Health Care       Date:  1994-06

10.  Template matching for auditing hospital cost and quality.

Authors:  Jeffrey H Silber; Paul R Rosenbaum; Richard N Ross; Justin M Ludwig; Wei Wang; Bijan A Niknam; Nabanita Mukherjee; Philip A Saynisch; Orit Even-Shoshan; Rachel R Kelz; Lee A Fleisher
Journal:  Health Serv Res       Date:  2014-03-03       Impact factor: 3.402

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.