...
首页> 外文期刊>Medical care >The effect of publicly reporting hospital performance on market share and risk-adjusted mortality at high-mortality hospitals.
【24h】

The effect of publicly reporting hospital performance on market share and risk-adjusted mortality at high-mortality hospitals.

机译:公开报告医院绩效对高死亡率医院的市场份额和风险调整后死亡率的影响。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
   

获取外文期刊封面封底 >>

       

摘要

BACKGROUND: It is unclear whether publicly reporting hospitals' risk-adjusted mortality affects market share and mortality at outlier hospitals. OBJECTIVES: To examine hospitals' market share and risk-adjusted mortality from 1991 to 1997 at hospitals participating in Cleveland Health Quality Choice (CHQC). RESEARCH DESIGN: Time series. SUBJECTS: Changes in market share were examined for all patients hospitalized with acute myocardial infarction, heart failure, gastrointestinal hemorrhage, obstructive pulmonary disease, pneumonia, or stroke at all 30 nonfederal hospitals in Northeast Ohio. Patients insured by Medicare were used to examine changes in mortality. MEASURES: Trends in market share (proportion of patients with the target conditions discharged from a given hospital) and risk-adjusted 30-day mortality. RESULTS: CHQC identified several hospitals with consistently higher than expected mortality. The five hospitals with the highest mortality tended to lose market share (mean change -0.6%, 95% CI -1.9-0.6), but this was not significant. The only outlier hospital with a large decline in market share had declining volume for 2 years before being declared an outlier. Risk-adjusted mortality declined only slightly at hospitals classified by us as "below average" (-0.8%; 95% CI, 2.9-1.8%) or "worst" (-0.4%; 95% CI -2.3-1.7). However, risk-adjusted mortality at one hospital changed from consistently above expected to consistently below expected shortly after first being declared an outlier. CONCLUSION: Despite CHQC's strengths, identifying hospitals with higher than expected mortality did not adversely affect their market share or, with one exception, lead to improved outcomes. This failure may have resulted from consumer disinterest or difficulty interpreting CHQC reports, unwillingness of businesses to create incentives targeted to hospitals' performance, and hospitals' inability to develop effective quality improvement programs.
机译:背景:目前尚不清楚公开报告医院的风险调整后死亡率是否会影响离群医院的市场份额和死亡率。目的:研究1991年至1997年参加克利夫兰医疗质量选择计划(CHQC)的医院的市场份额和经风险调整的死亡率。研究设计:时间序列。研究对象:俄亥俄州东北部所有30家非联邦医院的所有急性心肌梗死,心力衰竭,胃肠道出血,阻塞性肺疾病,肺炎或中风住院患者的市场份额变化均得到了检查。由Medicare投保的患者用于检查死亡率的变化。度量:市场份额(从某家医院出院的目标疾病患者的比例)和经过风险调整的30天死亡率的趋势。结果:CHQC确定了几家死亡率始终高于预期的医院。死亡率最高的五家医院往往会失去市场份额(平均变化-0.6%,95%CI -1.9-0.6),但这并不显着。唯一一家市场份额大幅下降的离群医院在宣布为离群之前已连续两年下降。在我们分类为“低于平均水平”(-0.8%; 95%CI,2.9-1.8%)或“最差”(-0.4%; 95%CI -2.3-1.7)的医院中,风险调整后的死亡率仅略有下降。但是,在被宣布为异常值后不久,一家医院的风险调整后死亡率从始终高于预期的水平变为始终低于预期的水平。结论:尽管CHQC有其优势,但确定死亡率高于预期的医院并没有对其市场份额产生不利影响,或者,除了一个例外,它可以改善结果。失败的原因可能是消费者不感兴趣或难以解释CHQC报告,企业不愿针对医院的绩效制定激励措施以及医院无法制定有效的质量改进计划。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号