Literature DB >> 30520027

Quality-based ratings in Medicare and trends in kidney transplantation.

Mariétou H Ouayogodé1.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To assess the relationship between the 2007 Medicare regulation enforcing quality standards for transplant centers and trends in kidney transplantation. DATA SOURCES: Transplant centers' biannual reports and the national registry for kidney transplantation from 2003 to 2010. STUDY
DESIGN: Non-compliant (low-performing) centers were compared with centers in compliance with quality standards according to: number of transplants, waiting-list registrations, and rates of graft failures, transfers, and deaths. Multivariate regressions were estimated to evaluate the association between the regulation and transplantation outcomes. DATA EXTRACTION
METHODS: Patient characteristics and outcomes were aggregated to six-month periods and linked to centers' reports. PRINCIPAL
FINDINGS: Relative to average-performing centers, 12 percent of transplants shifted away from low-performing centers and high-performing centers captured 6 percent of this decline. Low-performing centers experienced a 2-percentage point per period decline in 1-year graft failure rates and a 15-percent decrease in registrations post-regulation, whereas high-performing centers incurred a 5-percent decrease in registrations relative to average-performing centers.
CONCLUSIONS: Government oversight in kidney transplantation was associated with a small downward shift in overall kidney transplants. Reductions in graft failure rates at low-performing centers may imply an increase in quality or a decline in transplantation of either marginal organs or riskier patients; whereas reductions in registrations may indicate risk aversion toward high-risk patients. Policy makers should consider making less punitive requirements for programs, which employ new transplantation techniques to expand access. © Health Research and Educational Trust.

Entities:  

Keywords:  quality rating; regulation; report card; transplantation; volume

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 30520027      PMCID: PMC6338323          DOI: 10.1111/1475-6773.13098

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Health Serv Res        ISSN: 0017-9124            Impact factor:   3.734


  37 in total

1.  Strategies for improving surgical quality--should payers reward excellence or effort?

Authors:  Nancy J O Birkmeyer; John D Birkmeyer
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2006-02-23       Impact factor: 91.245

2.  Quality of care information makes a difference: an analysis of market share and price changes after publication of the New York State Cardiac Surgery Mortality Reports.

Authors:  D B Mukamel; A I Mushlin
Journal:  Med Care       Date:  1998-07       Impact factor: 2.983

Review 3.  The urgent need to improve health care quality. Institute of Medicine National Roundtable on Health Care Quality.

Authors:  M R Chassin; R W Galvin
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  1998-09-16       Impact factor: 56.272

4.  The effect of pay-for-performance in hospitals: lessons for quality improvement.

Authors:  Rachel M Werner; Jonathan T Kolstad; Elizabeth A Stuart; Daniel Polsky
Journal:  Health Aff (Millwood)       Date:  2011-04       Impact factor: 6.301

5.  The Role of Information in Medical Markets: An Analysis of Publicly Reported Outcomes in Cardiac Surgery.

Authors:  David M Cutler; Robert S Huckman; Mary Beth Landrum
Journal:  Am Econ Rev       Date:  2004

6.  The association of center performance evaluations and kidney transplant volume in the United States.

Authors:  J D Schold; L D Buccini; T R Srinivas; R T Srinivas; E D Poggio; S M Flechner; C Soria; D L Segev; J Fung; D A Goldfarb
Journal:  Am J Transplant       Date:  2013-01       Impact factor: 8.086

7.  The unintended consequences of publicly reporting quality information.

Authors:  Rachel M Werner; David A Asch
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2005-03-09       Impact factor: 56.272

8.  Change in the quality of care delivered to Medicare beneficiaries, 1998-1999 to 2000-2001.

Authors:  Stephen F Jencks; Edwin D Huff; Timothy Cuerdon
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2003-01-15       Impact factor: 56.272

9.  Payers test reference pricing and centers of excellence to steer patients to low-price and high-quality providers.

Authors:  James C Robinson; Kimberly MacPherson
Journal:  Health Aff (Millwood)       Date:  2012-09       Impact factor: 6.301

View more
  2 in total

1.  Quality-based ratings in Medicare and trends in kidney transplantation.

Authors:  Mariétou H Ouayogodé
Journal:  Health Serv Res       Date:  2018-12-05       Impact factor: 3.734

2.  Patient selection in the presence of regulatory oversight based on healthcare report cards of providers: the case of organ transplantation.

Authors:  Mariétou H Ouayogodé; Kurt E Schnier
Journal:  Health Care Manag Sci       Date:  2021-01-08
  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.