Dataset Information

Evidence of the Linkage Between Hospital-based Care Coordination Strategies and Hospital Overall (Star) Ratings.

ABSTRACT:

Background

In the new era of value-based payment models and pay for performance, hospitals are in search of the silver bullet strategy or bundle of strategies capable of improving their performance on quality measures.

Objectives

To determine whether there is an association between adoption of hospital-based care coordination strategies and Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services overall hospital quality (star) ratings and readmission rates.

Research design

We used survey data from the American Hospital Association (AHA) and categorized respondents by the number of care coordination strategies that they reported having widely implemented. We used multiple logistic regression models to examine the association between the number of strategies and hospital overall rating performance and disease-specific 30-day excess readmission ratios, while controlling for hospital and county characteristics and state-fixed effects.

Subjects

A total of 710 general acute care noncritical access hospitals that received star ratings and responded to the 2015 AHA Care Systems and Payment Survey.

Measures

Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services overall hospital ratings, 30-day excess readmission ratios.

Results

As compared with hospitals with 0-2 strategies, hospitals with 3 to 4 strategies (P=0.007), 5-7 strategies (P=0.002), or 8-12 strategies (P=0.002) had approximately 2.5× the odds of receiving a top rating (4 or 5 stars). Care coordination strategies were positively associated with lower 30-day readmission ratios for patients with chronic medical conditions, but not for surgical patients. Medication reconciliation, visit summaries, outreach after discharge, discharge care plans, and disease management programs were each individually associated with top ratings.

Conclusions

Care coordination strategies are associated with high overall hospital ratings.

SUBMITTER: Benjenk I

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6904513 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Jan

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Evidence of the Linkage Between Hospital-based Care Coordination Strategies and Hospital Overall (Star) Ratings.

Benjenk Ivy I Franzini Luisa L Chen Jie J

Medical care 20200101 1

<h4>Background</h4>In the new era of value-based payment models and pay for performance, hospitals are in search of the silver bullet strategy or bundle of strategies capable of improving their performance on quality measures.<h4>Objectives</h4>To determine whether there is an association between adoption of hospital-based care coordination strategies and Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services overall hospital quality (star) ratings and readmission rates.<h4>Research design</h4>We used surve ...[more]

PMID: 31725493

Similar Datasets

Project description:ImportanceThe Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) Hospital Compare star ratings are widely used summaries of hospital quality that can influence patient choice and organizational reputation.ObjectiveTo identify the changes in hospital ratings and rankings associated with alternative methodological choices in the calculation of the 2021 CMS Hospital Compare star ratings.Design setting and participantsThis cross-sectional study used publicly available 2021 Hospital Compare data for 3339 US hospitals from the October 2020 data release. Change in apparent hospital performance was assessed, arising when plausible alternatives to current methods are used for calculating star ratings in relation to individual measure standardization, domain derivation, and domain weighting. Three example changes were examined in detail, with more comprehensive changes considered using Monte Carlo simulation. Changes in centile of hospital ranks and in star rating overall were examined, as well as separately in CMS peer groupings defined by the number of reported quality domains.Main outcomes and measuresProportion of hospitals receiving a different star rating under the alternative technical specifications than under the current (2021) CMS approach and mean absolute change in centile rank of hospitals under alternative technical specifications compared with the current (2021) CMS approach.ResultsA total of 3339 US hospitals were included in the analysis. Of the specific changes to current specifications considered, the alternative method of standardization was associated with the most substantial changes, with 55.4% (95% CI, 53.7%-57.1%) of hospitals having their star rating reclassified. The change in domain weights was associated with the smallest differences, but even that resulted in reclassification of the star rating in approximately 1 in 4 (24.5%; 95% CI, 23.0%-26.0%) hospitals. In the simulation study, which covered a range of possible changes, on average half of hospitals (51.8%; IQR, 44.2%-59.7%) were assigned a different star rating from that produced by the current specification, usually into an adjacent star category.Conclusions and relevanceIn this cross-sectional study of data on US hospitals, CMS Hospital Compare star ratings were found to be highly sensitive to how performance ratings are calculated, demonstrating the need for transparent justification of the technical approaches used in calculating composite performance ratings.

Project description:ImportanceMedicare Advantage (MA) plans, which disproportionately enroll racial/ethnic minorities and persons with socioeconomic disadvantage, receive bonus payments on the basis of overall performance on a 5-star rating scale. The association between plans' overall quality and disparities in quality is not well understood.ObjectiveTo examine the association between MA star ratings and disparities in care for racial/ethnic minorities and enrollees with lower income and educational attainment.Design setting and participantsThis cross-sectional study included 1 578 564 MA enrollees from 454 contracts across the 2015 and 2016 calendar years. Data analyses were conducted between June 2019 and June 2020.ExposuresSelf-reported race and ethnicity and low socioeconomic status (SES) (defined by low income or less than a high school education) vs high SES (neither low income nor low educational attainment).Main outcomes and measuresPerformance on 22 measures of quality and satisfaction determined at the individual enrollee level, aggregated into simulated star ratings (scale, 2-5) stratified by SES and race/ethnicity.ResultsA total of 1 578 564 enrollees were included in this analysis (55.8% female; mean [SD] age, 71.4 [11.3] years; 65.8% White; 12.3% Black; 14.6% Hispanic). Enrollees with low SES had simulated stratified star ratings 0.5 stars lower (95% CI, 0.4-0.6 stars) than individuals with high SES in the same contract. Black and Hispanic enrollees had simulated star ratings that were 0.3 stars (95% CI, 0.2-0.4 stars) and 0.1 stars (95% CI, -0.04 to 0.2 stars) lower than White enrollees within the same contracts. Black enrollees had a 0.4-star lower rating (95% CI, 0.1-0.7 stars) in 4.5- to 5-star contracts and a no statistical difference in 2.0- to 2.5-star-rated contracts (difference, 0.3 stars; 95% CI, -0.02 to 0.7 stars). Hispanic enrollees had a 0.6-star lower simulated rating (95% CI, 0.2-1.0 stars) in 4.5- to 5-star contracts and no statistical difference in 2- to 2.5-star contracts (difference, -0.01 stars; 95% CI, -0.5 to 0.4 stars). There was low correlation between simulated ratings for enrollees of low SES and high SES (difference, 0.2 stars; 95% CI, 0.03-0.4 stars) and between simulated ratings for White and Black enrollees (difference, 0.4 stars; 95% CI, 0.3-0.5 stars) and White and Hispanic enrollees (difference, 0.3 stars; 95% CI, 0.2-0.4 stars). As the proportion of Black and Hispanic enrollees increased in a contract, racial/ethnic disparities in ratings decreased.Conclusions and relevanceIn this cross-sectional study, simulated MA star ratings were only weakly correlated with those for enrollees of low SES in the same contract, and contracts with higher star ratings had larger disparities in quality. Measures of equity in MA plans' quality of care may be needed.

Project description:BackgroundThere have been public health interventions that aim to reduce barriers to health care access by extending opening hours of health care facilities. However, the impact of opening hours from the patient's perspective is not well understood.ObjectiveThis study aims to investigate the relationship between temporal accessibility of health care services and how patients rate the providers on Yelp, an online review website that is popular in the United States. Using crowdsourced open Internet data, such as Yelp, can help circumvent the traditional survey method.MethodsFrom Yelp's limited academic dataset, this study examined the pattern of visits to health care providers and performed a secondary analysis to examine the association between patient rating (measured by Yelp's rating) and temporal accessibility of health care services (measured by opening hours) using ordinal logistic regression models. Other covariates included were whether an appointment was required, the type of health care service, the region of the health care service provider, the number of reviews the health care service provider received in the past, the number of nearby competitors, the mean rating of competitors, and the standard deviation of competitors' ratings.ResultsFrom the 2085 health care service providers identified, opening hours during certain periods, the type of health care service, and the variability of competitors' ratings showed an association with patient rating. Most of the visits to health care service providers took place between normal working hours (9 AM-5 PM) from Sunday to Thursday, and the least on Saturday. A model fitted to the entire sample showed that increasing hours during normal working hours on Monday (OR 0.926, 95% CI 0.880-0.973, P=0.03), Saturday (OR 0.897, 95% CI 0.860-0.935, P<0.001), Sunday (OR 0.904, 95% CI 0.841-0.970, P=0.005), and outside normal working hours on Friday (OR 0.872, 95% CI 0.760-0.998, P=0.048) was associated with receiving lower ratings. But increasing hours during outside normal working hours on Sunday was associated with receiving higher ratings (OR 1.400, 95% CI 1.036-1.924, P=0.03). There were also observed differences in patient ratings among the health care services types, but not geographically or by appointment requirement.ConclusionsThis study shows that public health interventions, especially those involving opening hours, could use crowdsourced open Internet data to enhance the evidence base for decision making and evaluation in the future. This study illustrates one example of how Yelp data could be used to understand patient experiences with health care services, making a case for future research for exploring online reviews as a health dataset.

Project description:BackgroundAs health systems transition to value-based care, improving transitional care (TC) remains a priority. Hospitals implementing evidence-based TC models often adapt them to local contexts. However, limited research has evaluated which groups of TC strategies, or transitional care activities, commonly implemented by hospitals correspond with improved patient outcomes. In order to identify TC strategy groups for evaluation, we applied a data-driven approach informed by literature review and expert opinion.MethodsBased on a review of evidence-based TC models and the literature, focus groups with patients and family caregivers identifying what matters most to them during care transitions, and expert review, the Project ACHIEVE team identified 22 TC strategies to evaluate. Patient exposure to TC strategies was measured through a hospital survey (N = 42) and prospective survey of patients discharged from those hospitals (N = 8080). To define groups of TC strategies for evaluation, we performed a multistep process including: using ACHIEVE'S prior retrospective analysis; performing exploratory factor analysis, latent class analysis, and finite mixture model analysis on hospital and patient survey data; and confirming results through expert review. Machine learning (e.g., random forest) was performed using patient claims data to explore the predictive influence of individual strategies, strategy groups, and key covariates on 30-day hospital readmissions.ResultsThe methodological approach identified five groups of TC strategies that were commonly delivered as a bundle by hospitals: 1) Patient Communication and Care Management, 2) Hospital-Based Trust, Plain Language, and Coordination, 3) Home-Based Trust, Plain language, and Coordination, 4) Patient/Family Caregiver Assessment and Information Exchange Among Providers, and 5) Assessment and Teach Back. Each TC strategy group comprises three to six, non-mutually exclusive TC strategies (i.e., some strategies are in multiple TC strategy groups). Results from random forest analyses revealed that TC strategies patients reported receiving were more important in predicting readmissions than TC strategies that hospitals reported delivering, and that other key co-variates, such as patient comorbidities, were the most important variables.ConclusionSophisticated statistical tools can help identify underlying patterns of hospitals' TC efforts. Using such tools, this study identified five groups of TC strategies that have potential to improve patient outcomes.

Dataset Information

Evidence of the Linkage Between Hospital-based Care Coordination Strategies and Hospital Overall (Star) Ratings.

Background

Objectives

Research design

Subjects

Measures

Results

Conclusions

Publications

Evidence of the Linkage Between Hospital-based Care Coordination Strategies and Hospital Overall (Star) Ratings.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets