Literature DB >> 9107205

Risk-adjusted outcome measures and quality of care in nursing homes.

D B Mukamel1.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: This study examines the use of the patient review instrument (PRI), a reimbursement reporting system used by the New York State Department of Health, to assess quality of care based on risk-adjusted outcomes.
METHODS: Data for all residents in approximately 550 nursing homes in upstate New York are used to develop five risk-adjusted outcome measures. The five measures are rates of decline in functional status activities of daily living (ADL), rates of increases in severity of decubitus ulcers, physical restraints rates, dehydration rates, and rates of major accidents. Logistic models are used to adjust for individual patients' risk factors. The face validity, content, construct, and criterion validity of these measures is examined.
RESULTS: Measures based on ADL decline, deterioration in decubiti, and physical restraints rates met all validity criteria and were correlated significantly with deficiency citations. Measures based on accident rates and rates of dehydration did not perform as well. There was significant variation in these quality measures across regions and between for-profit and nonprofit nursing homes.
CONCLUSIONS: Information about quality of care is important to the efficient operation of competitive markets. Such information, however, often is costly to obtain and not available to individual patients. This study demonstrates that valid risk-adjusted outcome measures of quality can be developed based on data collected for reimbursement purposes.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1997        PMID: 9107205     DOI: 10.1097/00005650-199704000-00007

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Med Care        ISSN: 0025-7079            Impact factor:   2.983


  20 in total

1.  Does prospective payment really contain nursing home costs?

Authors:  Li-Wu Chen; Dennis G Shea
Journal:  Health Serv Res       Date:  2002-04       Impact factor: 3.402

2.  Quality improvement implementation in the nursing home.

Authors:  Dan R Berlowitz; Gary J Young; Elaine C Hickey; Debra Saliba; Brian S Mittman; Elaine Czarnowski; Barbara Simon; Jennifer J Anderson; Arlene S Ash; Lisa V Rubenstein; Mark A Moskowitz
Journal:  Health Serv Res       Date:  2003-02       Impact factor: 3.402

3.  Rural-urban differences in end-of-life nursing home care: facility and environmental factors.

Authors:  Helena Temkin-Greener; Nan Tracy Zheng; Dana B Mukamel
Journal:  Gerontologist       Date:  2012-01-09

4.  End-of-life quality-of-care measures for nursing homes: place of death and hospice.

Authors:  Dana B Mukamel; Thomas Caprio; Richard Ahn; Nan Tracy Zheng; Sally Norton; Timothy Quill; Helena Temkin-Greener
Journal:  J Palliat Med       Date:  2012-04       Impact factor: 2.947

5.  Is higher nursing home quality more costly?

Authors:  L Di Giorgio; M Filippini; G Masiero
Journal:  Eur J Health Econ       Date:  2015-11-26

Review 6.  Improving the quality of long-term care with better information.

Authors:  Vincent Mor
Journal:  Milbank Q       Date:  2005       Impact factor: 4.911

7.  Have Nursing Home Compare quality measure scores changed over time in response to competition?

Authors:  Nicholas G Castle; John Engberg; Darren Liu
Journal:  Qual Saf Health Care       Date:  2007-06

8.  Improving quality assessment through multilevel modeling: the case of nursing home compare.

Authors:  Greg Arling; Teresa Lewis; Robert L Kane; Christine Mueller; Shannon Flood
Journal:  Health Serv Res       Date:  2007-06       Impact factor: 3.402

9.  Is there evidence of cream skimming among nursing homes following the publication of the Nursing Home Compare report card?

Authors:  Dana B Mukamel; Heather Ladd; David L Weimer; William D Spector; Jacqueline S Zinn
Journal:  Gerontologist       Date:  2009-06-02

10.  National release of the nursing home quality report cards: implications of statistical methodology for risk adjustment.

Authors:  Yue Li; Xueya Cai; Laurent G Glance; William D Spector; Dana B Mukamel
Journal:  Health Serv Res       Date:  2009-02       Impact factor: 3.402

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.