Dataset Information

Association between physician US News & World Report medical school ranking and patient outcomes and costs of care: observational study.

ABSTRACT:

Objective

To investigate whether the US News & World Report (USNWR) ranking of the medical school a physician attended is associated with patient outcomes and healthcare spending.

Design

Observational study.

Setting

Medicare, 2011-15.

Participants

20% random sample of Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries aged 65 years or older (n=996?212), who were admitted as an emergency to hospital with a medical condition and treated by general internists.

Main outcome measures

Association between the USNWR ranking of the medical school a physician attended and the physician's patient outcomes (30 day mortality and 30 day readmission rates) and Medicare Part B spending, adjusted for patient and physician characteristics and hospital fixed effects (which effectively compared physicians practicing within the same hospital). A sensitivity analysis employed a natural experiment by focusing on patients treated by hospitalists, because patients are plausibly randomly assigned to hospitalists based on their specific work schedules. Alternative rankings of medical schools based on social mission score or National Institute of Health (NIH) funding were also investigated.

Results

996?212 admissions treated by 30?322 physicians were examined for the analysis of mortality. When using USNWR primary care rankings, physicians who graduated from higher ranked schools had slightly lower 30 day readmission rates (adjusted rate 15.7% for top 10 schools v 16.1% for schools ranked ?50; adjusted risk difference 0.4%, 95% confidence interval 0.1% to 0.8%; P for trend=0.005) and lower spending (adjusted Part B spending $1029 (£790; €881) v $1066; adjusted difference $36, 95% confidence interval $20 to $52; P for trend <0.001) compared with graduates of lower ranked schools, but no difference in 30 day mortality. When using USNWR research rankings, physicians graduating from higher ranked schools had slightly lower healthcare spending than graduates from lower ranked schools, but no differences in patient mortality or readmissions. A sensitivity analysis restricted to patients treated by hospitalists yielded similar findings. Little or no relation was found between alternative rankings (based on social mission score or NIH funding) and patient outcomes or costs of care.

Conclusions

Overall, little or no relation was found between the USNWR ranking of the medical school from which a physician graduated and subsequent patient mortality or readmission rates. Physicians who graduated from highly ranked medical schools had slightly lower spending than graduates of lower ranked schools.

SUBMITTER: Tsugawa Y

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6156557 | biostudies-literature | 2018 Sep

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Association between physician <i>US News & World Report</i> medical school ranking and patient outcomes and costs of care: observational study.

Tsugawa Yusuke Y Blumenthal Daniel M DM Jha Ashish K AK Orav E John EJ Jena Anupam B AB

BMJ (Clinical research ed.) 20180926

<h4>Objective</h4>To investigate whether the <i>US News & World Report</i> (USNWR) ranking of the medical school a physician attended is associated with patient outcomes and healthcare spending.<h4>Design</h4>Observational study.<h4>Setting</h4>Medicare, 2011-15.<h4>Participants</h4>20% random sample of Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries aged 65 years or older (n=996 212), who were admitted as an emergency to hospital with a medical condition and treated by general internists.<h4>Main outcom ...[more]

PMID: 30257919

Similar Datasets

Project description:ImportanceThe US News & World Report (USNWR) annual ranking of the best hospitals for gastroenterology and gastrointestinal operations provides guidance and referral of care for medical and surgical gastrointestinal conditions.ObjectiveTo investigate whether USNWR top-ranked hospitals for gastroenterology and gastrointestinal surgical procedures are associated with improvements in patient outcomes, compared with nonranked hospitals, in common advanced laparoscopic abdominal operations.Design, setting, and participantsThis study used the Vizient database, which contains administrative, clinical, and financial inpatient information of index hospitalizations for US academic centers and their affiliated hospitals that are members of Vizient. Data were obtained on advanced laparoscopic abdominal operations performed from January 1, 2017, through December 31, 2017, at USNWR top-ranked hospitals (n = 16 296 operations) and nonranked hospitals (n = 35 573 operations). Abdominal operations included bariatric, colorectal, and hiatal hernia procedures. Operations on patients younger than 18 years, emergent cases, conversion cases, and patients with extreme severity of illness were excluded.Main outcomes and measuresOutcome measures included in-hospital mortality, mortality index (observed to expected mortality ratio), serious morbidity, length of stay, and cost.ResultsA total of 51 869 advanced laparoscopic abdominal operations were performed at 351 academic health centers and their community affiliates. Of these procedures, 16 296 (31.4%) were performed at 41 top-ranked hospitals and 35 573 (68.6%) at 310 nonranked hospitals. The annual case volume at top-ranked hospitals was 397 compared with 114 at nonranked hospitals. Between top-ranked and nonranked hospitals, no significant differences were found in in-hospital mortality (0.04% vs 0.07%; P = .33) or serious morbidity (1.06% vs 1.02%; P = .75). Compared with nonranked hospitals, advanced laparoscopic abdominal operations performed at top-ranked hospitals had higher mean costs ($7128 [$4917] vs $7742 [$6787]; P < .01) and longer mean lengths of stay (2.38 [2.60] days vs 2.73 [3.31] days; P < .01).Conclusions and relevanceAlthough, among academic centers, the annual volume of advanced laparoscopic abdominal operations was 3-fold higher for USNWR top-ranked hospitals compared with nonranked hospitals, the volume did not appear to be associated with improved patient outcomes.

Project description:BackgroundPhysicians have dual responsibilities to make medical decisions that serve their patients' best interests but also utilize health care resources wisely. Their ability to practice cost-consciously is particularly challenged when faced with patient expectations or requests for medical services that may be unnecessary.ObjectiveTo understand how physicians consider health care resources and the strategies they use to exercise cost-consciousness in response to patient expectations and requests for medical care.DesignExploratory, qualitative focus groups of practicing physicians were conducted. Participants were encouraged to discuss their perceptions of resource constraints, and experiences with redundant, unnecessary and marginally beneficial services, and were asked about patient requests or expectations for particular services.ParticipantsSixty-two physicians representing a variety of specialties and practice types participated in nine focus groups in Michigan, Ohio, and Minnesota in 2012 MEASUREMENTS: Iterative thematic content analysis of focus group transcriptsPrincipal findingsPhysicians reported making trade-offs between a variety of financial and nonfinancial resources, considering not only the relative cost of medical decisions and alternative services, but the time and convenience of patients, their own time constraints, as well as the logistics of maintaining a successful practice. They described strategies and techniques to educate patients, build trust, or substitute less costly alternatives when appropriate, often adapting their management to the individual patient and clinical environment.ConclusionsPhysicians often make nuanced trade-offs in clinical practice aimed at efficient resource use within a complex flow of clinical work and patient expectations. Understanding the challenges faced by physicians and the strategies they use to exercise cost-consciousness provides insight into policy measures that will address physician's roles in health care resource use.

Project description:OBJECTIVE:Several large studies have shown that improving the patient experience is associated with higher reported patient satisfaction, increased adherence to treatment and clinical outcomes. Whether physician attire can affect the patient experience-and how this influences satisfaction-is unknown. Therefore, we performed a national, cross-sectional study to examine patient perceptions, expectations and preferences regarding physicians dress. SETTING:10 academic hospitals in the USA. PARTICIPANTS:Convenience sample of 4062 patients recruited from 1 June 2015 to 31 October 2016. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOMES MEASURES:We conducted a questionnaire-based study of patients across 10 academic hospitals in the USA. The questionnaire included photographs of a male and female physician dressed in seven different forms of attire. Patients were asked to rate the provider pictured in various clinical settings. Preference for attire was calculated as the composite of responses across five domains (knowledgeable, trustworthy, caring, approachable and comfortable) via a standardised instrument. Secondary outcome measures included variation in preferences by respondent characteristics (eg, gender), context of care (eg, inpatient vs outpatient) and geographical region. RESULTS:Of 4062 patient responses, 53% indicated that physician attire was important to them during care. Over one-third agreed that it influenced their satisfaction with care. Compared with all other forms of attire, formal attire with a white coat was most highly rated (p=0.001 vs scrubs with white coat; p<0.001 all other comparisons). Important differences in preferences for attire by clinical context and respondent characteristics were noted. For example, respondents≥65 years preferred formal attire with white coats (p<0.001) while scrubs were most preferred for surgeons. CONCLUSIONS:Patients have important expectations and perceptions for physician dress that vary by context and region. Nuanced policies addressing physician dress code to improve patient satisfaction appear important.