调整家庭健康排名的专利状态,以帮助患者选择优质服务

D. Zikos, N. Delellis
{"title":"调整家庭健康排名的专利状态,以帮助患者选择优质服务","authors":"D. Zikos, N. Delellis","doi":"10.1145/3056540.3076176","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Patients evaluate the quality of home health services (HHAs) using the HCAHPS survey. The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) publishes these ratings, using a five-star system. There are three types of HHAs, according to their proprietary status: governmental, non-profit and for-profit. The objective of this study is to, first measure differences of patient ratings between the three proprietary types, then construct an updated ranking, adjusted to the proprietary status, and finally develop a pilot interface to assist patients and their caregivers compare and choose high quality service. Five HCAHPS indicators were selected: summary rating, quality of patient care, professional care, communication and percent of patients who would recommend the agency to friends and family. Governmental and for-profit agencies received the highest and lowest summary ratings respectively (85.7% vs 53.3% were rated with four or five stars). Multiple comparisons with post hoc ANOVA analysis, revealed statistically significant differences for the majority of ratings, between and within the three different types of home health agencies (p <0.001). Since patients are often limited to agencies of a specific proprietary status, adjusted ratings comparing agencies to counterparts of same proprietary status, were constructed, and incorporated into a pilot interface. The interface will allow patients compare the original and adjusted ratings for specific HHAs of interest, or search by State, and zip code. Patients will therefore have a more realistic picture on how an agency stacks up against other candidates of same proprietary status, in an effort to choose optimal HH service.","PeriodicalId":140232,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on PErvasive Technologies Related to Assistive Environments","volume":"8 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-06-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Adjusting Home Health Rankings by Proprietary Status, to Assist Patients Select Quality Services\",\"authors\":\"D. Zikos, N. Delellis\",\"doi\":\"10.1145/3056540.3076176\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Patients evaluate the quality of home health services (HHAs) using the HCAHPS survey. The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) publishes these ratings, using a five-star system. There are three types of HHAs, according to their proprietary status: governmental, non-profit and for-profit. The objective of this study is to, first measure differences of patient ratings between the three proprietary types, then construct an updated ranking, adjusted to the proprietary status, and finally develop a pilot interface to assist patients and their caregivers compare and choose high quality service. Five HCAHPS indicators were selected: summary rating, quality of patient care, professional care, communication and percent of patients who would recommend the agency to friends and family. Governmental and for-profit agencies received the highest and lowest summary ratings respectively (85.7% vs 53.3% were rated with four or five stars). Multiple comparisons with post hoc ANOVA analysis, revealed statistically significant differences for the majority of ratings, between and within the three different types of home health agencies (p <0.001). Since patients are often limited to agencies of a specific proprietary status, adjusted ratings comparing agencies to counterparts of same proprietary status, were constructed, and incorporated into a pilot interface. The interface will allow patients compare the original and adjusted ratings for specific HHAs of interest, or search by State, and zip code. Patients will therefore have a more realistic picture on how an agency stacks up against other candidates of same proprietary status, in an effort to choose optimal HH service.\",\"PeriodicalId\":140232,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on PErvasive Technologies Related to Assistive Environments\",\"volume\":\"8 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2017-06-21\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on PErvasive Technologies Related to Assistive Environments\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1145/3056540.3076176\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on PErvasive Technologies Related to Assistive Environments","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1145/3056540.3076176","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

患者使用HCAHPS调查评估家庭保健服务(HHAs)的质量。医疗保险和医疗补助服务中心(CMS)使用五星级系统发布这些评级。根据其所有权状态,有三种类型的hha:政府,非营利和营利性。本研究的目的是,首先测量患者在三种专有类型之间的评分差异,然后构建一个更新的排名,调整到专有状态,最后开发一个试点界面,以帮助患者及其护理人员比较和选择高质量的服务。选择了五个HCAHPS指标:总结评分、患者护理质量、专业护理、沟通以及向朋友和家人推荐该机构的患者百分比。政府机构和营利性机构分别获得了最高和最低的综合评级(85.7%对53.3%的评级为四星或五星)。事后方差分析的多重比较显示,在三种不同类型的家庭保健机构之间和内部,大多数评分在统计学上存在显著差异(p <0.001)。由于患者通常仅限于具有特定专利地位的机构,因此构建了将机构与具有相同专利地位的机构进行比较的调整评级,并将其纳入试点界面。该界面将允许患者对感兴趣的特定hha进行原始和调整后的评分比较,或按州和邮政编码进行搜索。因此,患者将对机构如何与具有相同专利地位的其他候选机构进行比较有更现实的了解,从而努力选择最佳的HH服务。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Adjusting Home Health Rankings by Proprietary Status, to Assist Patients Select Quality Services
Patients evaluate the quality of home health services (HHAs) using the HCAHPS survey. The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) publishes these ratings, using a five-star system. There are three types of HHAs, according to their proprietary status: governmental, non-profit and for-profit. The objective of this study is to, first measure differences of patient ratings between the three proprietary types, then construct an updated ranking, adjusted to the proprietary status, and finally develop a pilot interface to assist patients and their caregivers compare and choose high quality service. Five HCAHPS indicators were selected: summary rating, quality of patient care, professional care, communication and percent of patients who would recommend the agency to friends and family. Governmental and for-profit agencies received the highest and lowest summary ratings respectively (85.7% vs 53.3% were rated with four or five stars). Multiple comparisons with post hoc ANOVA analysis, revealed statistically significant differences for the majority of ratings, between and within the three different types of home health agencies (p <0.001). Since patients are often limited to agencies of a specific proprietary status, adjusted ratings comparing agencies to counterparts of same proprietary status, were constructed, and incorporated into a pilot interface. The interface will allow patients compare the original and adjusted ratings for specific HHAs of interest, or search by State, and zip code. Patients will therefore have a more realistic picture on how an agency stacks up against other candidates of same proprietary status, in an effort to choose optimal HH service.
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信