Patient perspectives of care and process and outcome quality measures for heart failure admissions in US hospitals

How are they related in the era of public reporting?

Sydney E Dy, Kitty S. Chan, Hsien-Yen Chang, Allen Zhang, Junya Zhu, Deirdre Mylod

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Importance: Process quality measure performance has improved significantly with public reporting, requiring reevaluation of process-outcome relationships and the emerging role of patient perspectives on care.Objective: To evaluate associations between heart failure patient perspectives of care and publicly reported processes and outcomes.Design: Cross-sectional study, July 2008-June 2011.Setting: US hospitals in the Press Ganey database.Participants: Heart failure inpatients.Measures: Outcomes were Hospital Compare hospital-level risk-adjusted 30-day heart failure mortality and readmissions. Predictors included Hospital Compare heart failure processes of care, a weighted process composite and Hospital Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (HCAHPS) domains for heart failure. Hospital characteristics included volume of heart failure patients and race, health status and education.Results: Among 895 included hospitals, performance on process measures was high (median by hospital for composite, 95.6%); the median HCAHPS overall rating was 86.9. Median mortality was 11.3% and readmissions was 24.8%. No process measures were statistically significantly associated with lower mortality or readmissions in adjusted analyses. Higher ratings on HCAHPS patient perspectives of care were significantly correlated with lower readmissions in adjusted analyses, particularly those publicly reported domains conceptually related to readmissions. The magnitude was small (1.8 points higher on a 100-point scale between the highest and lowest quartiles of hospital readmissions).Conclusions: Publicly reported process quality measures were no longer associated with outcomes, but higher patient perspectives of care were associated with lower heart failure readmissions. These associations support continued reevaluation of these measures and increased emphasis on patient experience and outcomes, as planned for Value-Based Purchasing.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Article numbermzw063
Pages (from-to)522-528
Number of pages7
JournalInternational Journal for Quality in Health Care
Volume28
Issue number4
DOIs
StatePublished - Sep 1 2016

Fingerprint

Patient Care
Heart Failure
Outcome Assessment (Health Care)
Process Assessment (Health Care)
Health Personnel
Delivery of Health Care
Mortality
Value-Based Purchasing
Patient Readmission
Health Education
Health Status
Inpatients
Cross-Sectional Studies
Databases

Keywords

  • Heart failure
  • Hospital quality
  • Patient satisfaction
  • Public reporting
  • Quality measurement

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Health Policy
  • Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health

Cite this

@article{403dc5cce8514f8eb7c63bbcbf5834f8,
title = "Patient perspectives of care and process and outcome quality measures for heart failure admissions in US hospitals: How are they related in the era of public reporting?",
abstract = "Importance: Process quality measure performance has improved significantly with public reporting, requiring reevaluation of process-outcome relationships and the emerging role of patient perspectives on care.Objective: To evaluate associations between heart failure patient perspectives of care and publicly reported processes and outcomes.Design: Cross-sectional study, July 2008-June 2011.Setting: US hospitals in the Press Ganey database.Participants: Heart failure inpatients.Measures: Outcomes were Hospital Compare hospital-level risk-adjusted 30-day heart failure mortality and readmissions. Predictors included Hospital Compare heart failure processes of care, a weighted process composite and Hospital Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (HCAHPS) domains for heart failure. Hospital characteristics included volume of heart failure patients and race, health status and education.Results: Among 895 included hospitals, performance on process measures was high (median by hospital for composite, 95.6{\%}); the median HCAHPS overall rating was 86.9. Median mortality was 11.3{\%} and readmissions was 24.8{\%}. No process measures were statistically significantly associated with lower mortality or readmissions in adjusted analyses. Higher ratings on HCAHPS patient perspectives of care were significantly correlated with lower readmissions in adjusted analyses, particularly those publicly reported domains conceptually related to readmissions. The magnitude was small (1.8 points higher on a 100-point scale between the highest and lowest quartiles of hospital readmissions).Conclusions: Publicly reported process quality measures were no longer associated with outcomes, but higher patient perspectives of care were associated with lower heart failure readmissions. These associations support continued reevaluation of these measures and increased emphasis on patient experience and outcomes, as planned for Value-Based Purchasing.",
keywords = "Heart failure, Hospital quality, Patient satisfaction, Public reporting, Quality measurement",
author = "Dy, {Sydney E} and Chan, {Kitty S.} and Hsien-Yen Chang and Allen Zhang and Junya Zhu and Deirdre Mylod",
year = "2016",
month = "9",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1093/intqhc/mzw063",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "28",
pages = "522--528",
journal = "International Journal for Quality in Health Care",
issn = "1353-4505",
publisher = "Oxford University Press",
number = "4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Patient perspectives of care and process and outcome quality measures for heart failure admissions in US hospitals

T2 - How are they related in the era of public reporting?

AU - Dy, Sydney E

AU - Chan, Kitty S.

AU - Chang, Hsien-Yen

AU - Zhang, Allen

AU - Zhu, Junya

AU - Mylod, Deirdre

PY - 2016/9/1

Y1 - 2016/9/1

N2 - Importance: Process quality measure performance has improved significantly with public reporting, requiring reevaluation of process-outcome relationships and the emerging role of patient perspectives on care.Objective: To evaluate associations between heart failure patient perspectives of care and publicly reported processes and outcomes.Design: Cross-sectional study, July 2008-June 2011.Setting: US hospitals in the Press Ganey database.Participants: Heart failure inpatients.Measures: Outcomes were Hospital Compare hospital-level risk-adjusted 30-day heart failure mortality and readmissions. Predictors included Hospital Compare heart failure processes of care, a weighted process composite and Hospital Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (HCAHPS) domains for heart failure. Hospital characteristics included volume of heart failure patients and race, health status and education.Results: Among 895 included hospitals, performance on process measures was high (median by hospital for composite, 95.6%); the median HCAHPS overall rating was 86.9. Median mortality was 11.3% and readmissions was 24.8%. No process measures were statistically significantly associated with lower mortality or readmissions in adjusted analyses. Higher ratings on HCAHPS patient perspectives of care were significantly correlated with lower readmissions in adjusted analyses, particularly those publicly reported domains conceptually related to readmissions. The magnitude was small (1.8 points higher on a 100-point scale between the highest and lowest quartiles of hospital readmissions).Conclusions: Publicly reported process quality measures were no longer associated with outcomes, but higher patient perspectives of care were associated with lower heart failure readmissions. These associations support continued reevaluation of these measures and increased emphasis on patient experience and outcomes, as planned for Value-Based Purchasing.

AB - Importance: Process quality measure performance has improved significantly with public reporting, requiring reevaluation of process-outcome relationships and the emerging role of patient perspectives on care.Objective: To evaluate associations between heart failure patient perspectives of care and publicly reported processes and outcomes.Design: Cross-sectional study, July 2008-June 2011.Setting: US hospitals in the Press Ganey database.Participants: Heart failure inpatients.Measures: Outcomes were Hospital Compare hospital-level risk-adjusted 30-day heart failure mortality and readmissions. Predictors included Hospital Compare heart failure processes of care, a weighted process composite and Hospital Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (HCAHPS) domains for heart failure. Hospital characteristics included volume of heart failure patients and race, health status and education.Results: Among 895 included hospitals, performance on process measures was high (median by hospital for composite, 95.6%); the median HCAHPS overall rating was 86.9. Median mortality was 11.3% and readmissions was 24.8%. No process measures were statistically significantly associated with lower mortality or readmissions in adjusted analyses. Higher ratings on HCAHPS patient perspectives of care were significantly correlated with lower readmissions in adjusted analyses, particularly those publicly reported domains conceptually related to readmissions. The magnitude was small (1.8 points higher on a 100-point scale between the highest and lowest quartiles of hospital readmissions).Conclusions: Publicly reported process quality measures were no longer associated with outcomes, but higher patient perspectives of care were associated with lower heart failure readmissions. These associations support continued reevaluation of these measures and increased emphasis on patient experience and outcomes, as planned for Value-Based Purchasing.

KW - Heart failure

KW - Hospital quality

KW - Patient satisfaction

KW - Public reporting

KW - Quality measurement

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84991790902&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84991790902&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1093/intqhc/mzw063

DO - 10.1093/intqhc/mzw063

M3 - Article

VL - 28

SP - 522

EP - 528

JO - International Journal for Quality in Health Care

JF - International Journal for Quality in Health Care

SN - 1353-4505

IS - 4

M1 - mzw063

ER -