内部操作指标和医疗保险和医疗补助服务中心医院比较质量评级。

IF 0.9 4区 医学 Q4 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
Michele Thornton, Sarah Bonzo, Raihan Khan, Leah Souza
{"title":"内部操作指标和医疗保险和医疗补助服务中心医院比较质量评级。","authors":"Michele Thornton,&nbsp;Sarah Bonzo,&nbsp;Raihan Khan,&nbsp;Leah Souza","doi":"10.1097/JHQ.0000000000000347","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Abstract: </strong>The Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) has made several refinements to their model for calculating hospital quality star ratings (Hospital Compare) amidst criticism and evidence of bias against some institutions. We argue that the CMS model does align with important internal quality metrics and encourage a measured approach to redesign, potentially using categorizations or tiers, rather than a complete abandonment of the ratings system. We find that institutional characteristics (available resources, average severity of illness, and academic affiliation) are associated with internal quality metrics related to patient flow. Furthermore, regression results from the original and revised CMS star rating methodologies suggest that patient flow metrics (discharges before noon [p < .01] and weekend discharges [p < .001]) have a positive relationship with the Hospital Compare rating. Hospitals with better patient flow, as measured by higher levels of discharges before noon and weekend discharges, are associated with higher CMS quality ratings. These findings suggest that CMS star ratings do reflect key aspects of operational performance, specifically efforts to improve patient flow, but the ranking system should consider hospital characteristics that influence internal operations as we move toward a system capable of quality and price transparency for consumers.</p>","PeriodicalId":48801,"journal":{"name":"Journal for Healthcare Quality","volume":"44 6","pages":"331-340"},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2022-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Internal Operational Metrics and Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services Hospital Compare Quality Ratings.\",\"authors\":\"Michele Thornton,&nbsp;Sarah Bonzo,&nbsp;Raihan Khan,&nbsp;Leah Souza\",\"doi\":\"10.1097/JHQ.0000000000000347\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Abstract: </strong>The Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) has made several refinements to their model for calculating hospital quality star ratings (Hospital Compare) amidst criticism and evidence of bias against some institutions. We argue that the CMS model does align with important internal quality metrics and encourage a measured approach to redesign, potentially using categorizations or tiers, rather than a complete abandonment of the ratings system. We find that institutional characteristics (available resources, average severity of illness, and academic affiliation) are associated with internal quality metrics related to patient flow. Furthermore, regression results from the original and revised CMS star rating methodologies suggest that patient flow metrics (discharges before noon [p < .01] and weekend discharges [p < .001]) have a positive relationship with the Hospital Compare rating. Hospitals with better patient flow, as measured by higher levels of discharges before noon and weekend discharges, are associated with higher CMS quality ratings. These findings suggest that CMS star ratings do reflect key aspects of operational performance, specifically efforts to improve patient flow, but the ranking system should consider hospital characteristics that influence internal operations as we move toward a system capable of quality and price transparency for consumers.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48801,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal for Healthcare Quality\",\"volume\":\"44 6\",\"pages\":\"331-340\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-11-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal for Healthcare Quality\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1097/JHQ.0000000000000347\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal for Healthcare Quality","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/JHQ.0000000000000347","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

摘要:美国医疗保险和医疗补助服务中心(CMS)对其计算医院质量星级评级(hospital Compare)的模型进行了几项改进,以应对针对某些机构的批评和偏见。我们认为CMS模型确实与重要的内部质量指标保持一致,并鼓励采用测量方法重新设计,可能使用分类或分层,而不是完全放弃评级系统。我们发现机构特征(可用资源、平均疾病严重程度和学术关系)与患者流量相关的内部质量指标相关。此外,原始和修订的CMS星级评定方法的回归结果表明,患者流量指标(中午前出院[p < .01]和周末出院[p < .001])与医院比较评分呈正相关。患者流量较好的医院,如中午前和周末出院率较高的医院,与较高的CMS质量评级相关。这些发现表明,CMS星级评级确实反映了运营绩效的关键方面,特别是改善患者流量的努力,但在我们向能够为消费者提供质量和价格透明度的系统迈进的过程中,排名系统应该考虑影响内部运营的医院特征。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Internal Operational Metrics and Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services Hospital Compare Quality Ratings.

Abstract: The Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) has made several refinements to their model for calculating hospital quality star ratings (Hospital Compare) amidst criticism and evidence of bias against some institutions. We argue that the CMS model does align with important internal quality metrics and encourage a measured approach to redesign, potentially using categorizations or tiers, rather than a complete abandonment of the ratings system. We find that institutional characteristics (available resources, average severity of illness, and academic affiliation) are associated with internal quality metrics related to patient flow. Furthermore, regression results from the original and revised CMS star rating methodologies suggest that patient flow metrics (discharges before noon [p < .01] and weekend discharges [p < .001]) have a positive relationship with the Hospital Compare rating. Hospitals with better patient flow, as measured by higher levels of discharges before noon and weekend discharges, are associated with higher CMS quality ratings. These findings suggest that CMS star ratings do reflect key aspects of operational performance, specifically efforts to improve patient flow, but the ranking system should consider hospital characteristics that influence internal operations as we move toward a system capable of quality and price transparency for consumers.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal for Healthcare Quality
Journal for Healthcare Quality HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES-
CiteScore
2.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
59
期刊介绍: The Journal for Healthcare Quality (JHQ), a peer-reviewed journal, is an official publication of the National Association for Healthcare Quality. JHQ is a professional forum that continuously advances healthcare quality practice in diverse and changing environments, and is the first choice for creative and scientific solutions in the pursuit of healthcare quality. It has been selected for coverage in Thomson Reuter’s Science Citation Index Expanded, Social Sciences Citation Index®, and Current Contents®. The Journal publishes scholarly articles that are targeted to leaders of all healthcare settings, leveraging applied research and producing practical, timely and impactful evidence in healthcare system transformation. The journal covers topics such as: Quality Improvement • Patient Safety • Performance Measurement • Best Practices in Clinical and Operational Processes • Innovation • Leadership • Information Technology • Spreading Improvement • Sustaining Improvement • Cost Reduction • Payment Reform
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信