The Combined Effect of Public Profiling and Quality Improvement Efforts on Heart Failure Management

Abstract

Background

A before-and-after study was conducted to examine the combined effect of public profiling and quality improvement activities on management of heart failure (HF) in the hospital setting.

Methods

Thirty-one hospitals in southeastern Michigan participated in this profiling and quality improvement study. One hospital closed after the baseline measurement. Two quality indicators were developed to evaluate the key processes of HF care, and one profiling indicator was designed for public profiling. The baseline results of the profiling indicator were publicly released. The individual hospitals were identified in the profiling report by name as “having statistically higher (or lower) rates than average.” Remeasurement results were compared to the baseline results by using t-tests for the individual hospitals and all 30 hospitals as an aggregate.

Results

Two-thirds of the hospitals improved ejection fraction documentation; the aggregate result improved 5.4 percentage points (p < 0.05). No change was observed in the aggregate measure of prescribing angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) to eligible HF patients at discharge. Hospitals with low baseline rates made improvement in ACEI use at discharge, but those with good baseline performance tended to decline in performance. There was a 2.2 percentage point increase (p < 0.05) in the profiling indicator.

Summary and conclusions

There seemed to be differential impacts of interventions across indicators and hospitals. Public profiling may have the most positive impact on hospitals with low performance at baseline. Maintaining the baseline good practice was a struggle for hospitals with relatively high baseline rates.