Literature DB >> 27317250

Patient perspectives of care and process and outcome quality measures for heart failure admissions in US hospitals: how are they related in the era of public reporting?

Sydney Morss Dy1, Kitty S Chan1, Hsien-Yen Chang1, Allen Zhang1, Junya Zhu1, Deirdre Mylod2.   

Abstract

IMPORTANCE: Process quality measure performance has improved significantly with public reporting, requiring reevaluation of process-outcome relationships and the emerging role of patient perspectives on care.
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate associations between heart failure patient perspectives of care and publicly reported processes and outcomes.
DESIGN: Cross-sectional study, July 2008-June 2011.
SETTING: US hospitals in the Press Ganey database. PARTICIPANTS: Heart failure inpatients. MEASURES: Outcomes were Hospital Compare hospital-level risk-adjusted 30-day heart failure mortality and readmissions. Predictors included Hospital Compare heart failure processes of care, a weighted process composite and Hospital Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (HCAHPS) domains for heart failure. Hospital characteristics included volume of heart failure patients and race, health status and education.
RESULTS: Among 895 included hospitals, performance on process measures was high (median by hospital for composite, 95.6%); the median HCAHPS overall rating was 86.9. Median mortality was 11.3% and readmissions was 24.8%. No process measures were statistically significantly associated with lower mortality or readmissions in adjusted analyses. Higher ratings on HCAHPS patient perspectives of care were significantly correlated with lower readmissions in adjusted analyses, particularly those publicly reported domains conceptually related to readmissions. The magnitude was small (1.8 points higher on a 100-point scale between the highest and lowest quartiles of hospital readmissions).
CONCLUSIONS: Publicly reported process quality measures were no longer associated with outcomes, but higher patient perspectives of care were associated with lower heart failure readmissions. These associations support continued reevaluation of these measures and increased emphasis on patient experience and outcomes, as planned for Value-Based Purchasing.
© The Author 2016. Published by Oxford University Press in association with the International Society for Quality in Health Care. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.

Entities:  

Keywords:  heart failure; hospital quality; patient satisfaction; public reporting; quality measurement

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27317250     DOI: 10.1093/intqhc/mzw063

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Qual Health Care        ISSN: 1353-4505            Impact factor:   2.038


  5 in total

1.  Roadmap to a successful quality improvement project.

Authors:  J R Swanson; S A Pearlman
Journal:  J Perinatol       Date:  2016-12-01       Impact factor: 2.521

Review 2.  Quality Measures in Heart Failure: the Past, the Present, and the Future.

Authors:  Carisi A Polanczyk; Karen B Ruschel; Fabio Morato Castilho; Antonio L Ribeiro
Journal:  Curr Heart Fail Rep       Date:  2019-02

3.  Quality measurement for cardiovascular diseases and cancer in hospital value-based healthcare: a systematic review of the literature.

Authors:  Rawia Abdalla; Milena Pavlova; Mohammed Hussein; Wim Groot
Journal:  BMC Health Serv Res       Date:  2022-08-01       Impact factor: 2.908

4.  Comparing textbook outcomes among patients undergoing surgery for cancer at U. S. News & World Report ranked hospitals.

Authors:  Rittal Mehta; Diamantis I Tsilimigras; Anghela Z Paredes; Kota Sahara; Amika Moro; Ayesha Farooq; Susan White; Aslam Ejaz; Allan Tsung; Mary Dillhoff; Jordan M Cloyd; Timothy M Pawlik
Journal:  J Surg Oncol       Date:  2020-03-02       Impact factor: 2.885

5.  Predicted quality benefits of achievable performance benchmarks of chronic heart failure care in China: results from a nationwide observational study.

Authors:  Chang Yin; Xi Li; Chao Wang; Jingkun Li; Xiaoqiang Bao; Qiuju Zhang; Yupeng Wang; Xudong Ma; Meina Liu
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2020-09-23       Impact factor: 2.692

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.