Characteristics and Predictors of HCAHPS Nonresponse After Spine Surgery

Preoperative predictors of two-year satisfaction in hand and wrist surgery patients

Purpose

As stakeholders seek to improve patient outcomes while maintaining cost-effectiveness in an increasingly expensive healthcare system, metrics such as patient satisfaction are becoming more important. This present study sought to identify factors associated with and independently predictive of better surgical satisfaction two years following hand and wrist surgery.

Methods

Patients undergoing hand and wrist surgery at an urban outpatient institution were enrolled preoperatively into a surgical registry and assessed two years postoperatively. Patient satisfaction with surgery was measured at two years postoperatively with the Surgical Satisfaction Questionnaire (SSQ-8). Bivariate analysis determined associations between postoperative satisfaction and patient demographics, injury specifiers, medical history, and multiple patient-reported outcomes (PROs). Multivariable analysis determined independent predictors of two-year postoperative satisfaction following hand and wrist surgery.

Results

Better surgical satisfaction was associated with having never smoked, no preoperative opioid use, lack of an accompanying legal claim, lack of a workers compensation claim, no clinical history of depression/anxiety, less comorbidities, and higher preoperative expectations.Various PROs relating to function, pain, activity, and general health at both baseline and two years demonstrated associations with postoperative satisfaction. Multivariable analysis confirmed that never smoking, lack of a legal claim, and better preoperative Brief Michigan Hand Questionnaire scores were independently predictive of better surgical satisfaction two years following hand and wrist surgery.

Conclusion

At two years following hand and wrist surgery, better patient satisfaction was best predicted by never smoking, no related legal claim, and better baseline Brief Michigan Hand Questionnaire scores.

Level of evidence

III.

Predictors of Postoperative Patient-Reported Outcome Measure Response Rates Among Patients With Rotator Cuff Repair

BACKGROUND

Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) contribute to evaluating and improving the quality of patient care. Patient outcomes after rotator cuff repair (RCR) have been researched; however, the relationship between PROM response rates and individual and health care correlates has not been thoroughly investigated.

PURPOSE

To examine differences in individual and health care factors among patients who had undergone RCR based on their PROM response rates.

STUDY DESIGN

Case-control study; Level of evidence, 3.

METHODS

Shoulder-specific and general PROMs were solicited via email and text message of all patients who underwent RCR between 2016 and 2020. Three subgroups were classified: (1) complete responders completed all 1-year postoperative PROMs, (2) partial responders answered enough questions to produce ≥1 usable score, and (3) nonresponders did not respond to a single measure. Correlates were assessed using analysis of variance and chi-square tests. Adjusted multinomial logistic regression models identified predictors of 1-year PROM response.

RESULTS

Of 2195 patients included at the 1-year follow-up, 34% were complete responders; 11%, partial responders; and 55%, nonresponders. Patients had a mean age of 61.8 years, 63% were men, and 90% were White. Pre- and postoperative PROM scores were similar across responder groups. In stepwise selection, 1-year responses (complete or partial) were associated with older age, later year of surgery, White race, and having workers' compensation insurance. The strongest predictor of PROM response was having workers' compensation insurance.

CONCLUSION

Patients with workers' compensation insurance compared with other insurance types responded to PROMs at disproportionately higher rates. This could distort postoperative PROM scores in the population studied because there are known differences among patients with this insurance status.

Why Did New York State Hospitals Rank So Poorly?

BACKGROUND

According to the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services star ratings, New York State (NYS) hospitals are relatively poor performers, with 33% achieving 1 star compared with 5% of hospitals across the United States.

OBJECTIVES

We compared NYS hospitals to all United States hospitals using Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services Hospital Value-Based Purchasing (HVBP) and star ratings component measures. We perform risk adjustment for hospital and market characteristics associated poor performance.

RESEARCH DESIGN

This was a cross-sectional observational study.

SUBJECTS

All acute care hospitals in the United States which had HVBP scores for 2019 in April 21, 2021, Hospital Care Compare database.

MEASURES

Analysis of variance was used to compare NYS hospitals to all United States hospitals. Multivariable-based risk adjustment was applied to NYS hospitals with adjustment for hospital characteristics (eg, occupancy, size), hospital fiscal ratios (eg, operating margin), and market characteristics (eg, percent of hospital market that has a high school diploma).

RESULTS

NYS hospitals averaged lower patient satisfaction and higher readmissions. These domains were statistically significantly associated with lower socioeconomic status in the hospital market area. Risk adjustment reduced but did not eliminate these differences. NYS also performed poorly on pressure ulcers and deep vein thrombosis/pulmonary embolism prevention. NYS hospitals were similar to the United States in mortality and hospital-acquired infections.

CONCLUSIONS

Differences in the demographic makeup of hospital markets account for some of the poor performance of NYS hospitals. Some aspects, such as long length of stay, may be associated with wider regional trends.

Response Bias for Press Ganey Ambulatory Surgery Surveys after Knee Surgery

The Press Ganey Ambulatory Surgery (PGAS) survey is an emerging tool used to capture patient satisfaction after elective surgery. Evaluating patient satisfaction is important; however, quality improvement (QI) surveys used to capture the patient experience may be subject to nonresponse bias. An orthopaedic registry was used to retrospectively identify patients who underwent ambulatory knee surgery from June 2015 to December 2019. Multivariable logistic regression was performed to identify independent predictors of PGAS survey nonresponse and response. In the cohort of 1,161 patients, 142 (12.2%) completed the PGAS survey. Multiple logistic regression demonstrated that male sex, Black race, not living with a caretaker, student or unemployment status, and worse preoperative Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) fatigue were predictors of nonresponse. The results of this study highlight the presence of nonresponse bias in the PGAS survey after elective knee surgery.

Revision Total Hip and Knee Arthroplasty are Associated With Lower Hospital Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems Patient Satisfaction Scores Compared With Primary Arthroplasty

INTRODUCTION

As rates of primary total joint arthroplasty continue to rise, so do rates of revision. Revision total hip arthroplasty (THA) and total knee arthroplasty (TKA) are more frequently done at larger centers, are associated with higher morbidity, and may have different patient satisfaction outcomes. This study compares the survey results of Hospital Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (HCAHPS) between patients who underwent primary versus revision THA or TKA.

METHODS

All adult patients who underwent inpatient, elective, primary, and revision THA or TKA at a single institution were selected for retrospective analysis. Patient demographics, comorbidities, functional status, surgical variables, 30-day outcomes, and HCAHPS scores were assessed. Univariate and multivariate analyses were done to determine correlations between the aforementioned variables and top-box HCAHPS survey scores for primary versus revision THA and TKA.

RESULTS

Of 2,707 patients who met the inclusion criteria and had returned the HCAHPS survey, primary THA was documented in 1,075 patients (39.71%), revision THA in 75 (2.77%), primary TKA in 1,497 (55.30%), and revision TKA in 60 (2.22%). Revision THA patients were more functionally dependent, and TKA patients had higher American Society of Anesthesiologists score than their primary comparators. Revisions had longer hospital length of stay for both procedures. For THA, revision THA patients demonstrated lower total top-box rates compared withprimary THA patients (71.64% versus 75.67% top-box, P < 0.001) and lower scores on the care from doctors subsection (76.26% versus 85.34%, P < 0.001) of the HCAHPS survey. Similarly, for TKA, revision TKA patients demonstrated lower total top-box rates (76.13% versus 79.22%, P < 0.013) and lower scores on the care from doctors subsection (66.28% versus 83.65%, P < 0.001) of the HCAHPS survey.

DISCUSSION

For both THA and TKA, revision procedures were associated with lower total HCAHPS scores and rated care from doctors. This suggests that HCAHPS scores may be biased by factors outside the surgeon's control, such as the complexity associated with revision procedures.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III.

Spine Surgery HCAHPS Patient Satisfaction Survey Results Inversely Correlate with Survey Response Time

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective review.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to understand the potential correlation of the Hospital Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (HCAHPS) survey response time on reported satisfaction following spine surgery hospitalization.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

With increasing emphasis on patient satisfaction metrics, such as HCAHPS, hospital reputations, and reimbursements are being affected by the results of such surveys. HCAHPS is a 32-question survey about patient experience in the hospital and after discharge.

METHODS

HCAHPS surveys were routinely sent to all patients admitted after spine surgery at an academic medical center between January 2013 and August 2017. Survey data, survey return time, patient demographics, and 30-day postoperative outcomes were gathered for all spine surgery patients who returned the survey. Multivariate regression analysis controlling for age, sex, BMI, functional status, American Society of Anesthesiologists class, education, and race was used to determine whether there were differences in rates of "Top Box" response between different time ranges of survey return.

RESULTS

In total, 1495 consecutive spinal surgery patients who returned their HCAHPS survey were identified. Of these, 31.51% returned their surveys within 21 days, 48.09% returned them between 22 to 42 days, 13.58% returned them between 43 to 64 days, and 6.82% returned them ≥65 days after distribution. Multivariate regression demonstrated no statistical differences in reported satisfaction between surveys returned between days 0 to 21 and days 22 to 42. However, there were significantly lower scores reported by surveys returned on days 43 to 64 and 65 plus days.

CONCLUSION

Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services only considers HCAHPS surveys returned within the first 42 days. It appears that the survey responses are similar over this time period. Beyond this time, lower scores are reported. Further attention to this less satisfied, later HCAHPS survey returning group seems warranted.Level of Evidence: 2.

Patient Factors and Perioperative Outcomes Affect Hospital Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems Survey Response Rates After Primary Total Hip Replacement

INTRODUCTION

The Hospital Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (HCAHPS) survey is a federally mandated survey that assesses patient satisfaction after hospitalization. It has been noted that a minority of patients actually return the survey. Potential bias in who does and does not respond to the survey (nonresponse bias) after total hip arthroplasty (THA) may affect the survey results.

METHODS

All adult patients undergoing inpatient elective primary THA between February 2013 and May 2020 at a single institution were selected for retrospective analysis. After discharge, all had been mailed the HCAHPS survey, and the primary outcome for the current study was survey return. Patient characteristics and 30-day perioperative outcomes were assessed. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to determine correlations between the above variables and HCAHPS survey return status.

RESULTS

Of 3,310 THA patients analyzed, 1,049 (31.69%) returned the HCAHPS surveys. On multivariate regression analyses, patients who did not return the survey were more likely to have a higher American Society of Anesthesia score (score of three or higher, odds ratio [OR] = 2.27; P < 0.001), be more functionally dependent (OR = 2.69; P = 0.005), or be Black/African American (OR = 3.40; P < 0.001). Similarly, patients who did not return the survey were more likely to have had any adverse event (OR = 1.80; P = 0.012), major adverse event (OR = 2.88; P = 0.007), readmission (OR = 2.13; P < 0.001), be discharged to a place other than home (OR = 1.71; P < 0.001), or stay in the hospital for longer than 3 days (OR = 1.89; P < 0.001).

DISCUSSION

After THA, the HCAHPS survey response rate was only 31.69% and completion of the survey correlated with demographic and perioperative variables. These findings suggest that the HCAHPS survey results should be interpreted as a skewed sample of the true surgical patient population. Nonresponse bias is an important factor to consider when evaluating healthcare quality, patient satisfaction survey results, and their effects on federal hospital reimbursement rates.

Variations in Patient Satisfaction Scores Between HCAHPS and a Novel Orthopedic Practice-Specific Survey

Performance on the Hospital Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (HCAHPS) survey can affect up to 33% of a physician's reimbursement from the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services. At this pseudo-private orthopedic practice, the authors characterized how physicians often achieve drastically different scores between HCAHPS and an Internal Patient Satisfaction Questionnaire (IPSQ). Eighteen physicians were ranked separately according to percentage of top-box scores on HCAHPS and IPSQ. There was an inverse relationship between physician rank for the 2 surveys according to Spearman correlation coefficient (ρ = -0.36, P = .15). Qualitative subanalysis indicated that although "physician interaction" was the most common reason for negative comments on HCAHPS, "ancillary staff" and "workflow" concerns were common on IPSQ. The outpatient setting remains a critical component in achieving high-quality orthopedic care. Consequently, HCAHPS alone may not be a sufficient indicator of patient satisfaction for orthopedic and other subspecialty practices.

Differences in Hospital Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (HCAHPS) Scores for a Single Surgeon Comparing Two Institutions: An Unfair Reimbursement Metric

BACKGROUND

Emphasis on value-based purchasing links physician financial remuneration to patient-derived outcome scores. Hospital Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (HCAHPS) surveys aim to provide a uniform comparison tool. Of the 22 different survey questions, only 3 (13.6%) focus on experience related to doctors. We sought to determine how HCAHPS scores differ for a single surgeon performing more than 500 total joint arthroplasties annually, divided almost equally between two centers.

METHODS

HCAHPS data from 2015 to 2018 for a single, fellowship-trained arthroplasty surgeon were collected from two different hospitals. More than 200 cases were performed at each center with the same staff. One center is a large metropolitan academic-teaching hospital, and the other is a suburban private hospital. The purpose of the study was to determine if differences existed regarding HCHAPS scores between the two institutions.

RESULTS

A significant difference was found between institutions regarding questions pertaining to "hospital environment," "admission process," and "hospital staff concern for pain," with more patients responding favorably in Institution Two than Institution One.

CONCLUSION

Patient perceptions and ratings of overall experience differ significantly between hospitals even when surgery is performed by a single surgeon. These results lend credence to the fact that surgeons should not be unduly penalized for the hospital in which they operate, and financial remuneration involving HCAHPS scores must be approached with caution. This unfair system could potentially drive surgeons to perform the majority of their cases in the hospital system with higher scores in the nonphysician related domains as this would affect overall patient satisfaction, and thus, financial compensation.

Predictors of Patient Satisfaction in Spine Surgery: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Recently, there has been increased interest in patient satisfaction measures such as Press Ganey and Hospital Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (HCAHPS) surveys. In this systematic review, the spine surgery literature is analyzed to evaluate factors predictive of patient satisfaction as measured by these surveys.

METHODS

A thorough literature search was performed in PubMed/MEDLINE, Google Scholar, and Cochrane databases. All English-language articles from database inception to July 2020 were screened for study inclusion according to PRISMA guidelines.

RESULTS

Twenty-four of the 1899 published studies were included for qualitative analysis. There has been a statistically significant increase in the number of publications across years (P = 0.04). Overall, the studies evaluated the relationship between patient satisfaction and patient demographics (71%), preoperative and intraoperative clinical factors (21%), and postoperative factors (33%). Top positive predictors of patient satisfaction were patient and nursing/medical staff relationship (n = 4; 17%), physician-patient relationship (n = 4; 17%), managerial oversight of received care (n = 3; 13%), same sex/ethnicity between patient and physician (n = 2; 8%), and older age (n = 2; 8%). Top negative predictors of patient satisfaction were high Charlson Comorbidity Index/high disability/worse overall health functioning (n = 7; 29%), increased length of hospital stay (n = 4; 17%), high rating for pain/complications/readmissions (n = 4; 17%), and psychosocial factors (n = 3; 13%).

CONCLUSIONS

There is heterogeneity in terms of different factors, both clinical and nonclinically related, that affect patient satisfaction ratings. More research is warranted to investigate the role of hospital consumer surveys in the spine surgical patient population.