Using Publicly Available Data to Construct a Transparent Measure of Health Care Value: A Method and Initial Results

Quality, outcome, and cost of care provided to very low birth weight infants in California

OBJECTIVE

To examine association of costs with quality of care and patient outcome across hospitals in California.

METHODS

Retrospective study of very low birth weight (VLBW) births from 2014-2018 linking birth certificate, hospital discharge records and clinical data. Quality was measured using the Baby-MONITOR score. Clinical outcome was measured using survival without major morbidity (SWMM). Hierarchical generalized linear models, adjusting for clinical factors, were used to estimate risk-adjusted measures of costs, quality, and outcome for each hospital. Association between these measures was evaluated using Pearson correlation coefficient.

RESULTS

In total, 15,415 infants from 104 NICUs were included. Risk-adjusted Baby-MONITOR score, SWMM rate, and costs varied substantially. There was no correlation between risk-adjusted cost and Baby-MONITOR score (r = 0, p = 0.998). Correlation between risk-adjusted cost and SWMM rate was inverse and not significant (r = -0.07, p = 0.48).

CONCLUSIONS

With the metrics used, we found no correlation between cost, quality, and outcomes in the care of VLBW infants.

The impact of transparency constraints on the efficiency of the Russian healthcare system: systematic literature review

There is an ongoing debate among researchers and policy-makers on how to make transparency a powerful tool of healthcare systems. This study addresses how the availability and accessibility of information about medical services to the general population affects healthcare outcomes in Russia. A systematic review was conducted and reported according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviewing and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines. Transparency indicators of health facilities used in the world's most efficient healthcare systems are also reviewed. Although the increase of transparency in the Russian healthcare system is considered as a tool for improving its efficiency, very little has been done to improve the actual level of transparency. The existing institutional specifics of the Russian healthcare system impose serious restrictions on acceptable levels of transparency. In the reviewed empirical Russian studies, transparency is often viewed simplistically as either information available on the websites of medical organizations or issues related to the amount of accessible indicators of compulsory medical statistical reporting. The novelty of this study consists in (a) reviewing the most recent studies on the topic and (b) including studies in Russian in the analysis. We elaborate on general and specific policy implications for improving transparency-driven outcomes in the Russian healthcare system.

Identifying drivers of health care value: a scoping review of the literature

Background

As health care spending reaches unsustainable levels, improving value has become an increasingly important policy priority. Relatively little research has explored factors driving value. As a first step towards filling this gap, we performed a scoping review of the literature to identify potential drivers of health care value.

Methods

Searches of PubMed, Embase, Google Scholar, Policy File, and SCOPUS were conducted between February and March 2020. Empirical studies that explored associations between any range of factors and value (loosely defined as quality or outcomes relative to cost) were eligible for inclusion. We created a template in Microsoft Excel for data extraction and evaluated the quality of included articles using the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme (CASP) quality appraisal tool. Data was synthesized using narrative methods.

Results

Twenty-two studies were included in analyses, of which 20 focused on low value service utilization. Independent variables represented a range of system-, hospital-, provider-, and patient-level characteristics. Although results were mixed, several consistent findings emerged. First, insurance incentive structures may affect value. For example, patients in Accountable Care Organizations had reduced rates of low value care utilization compared to patients in traditionally structured insurance plans. Second, higher intensity of care was associated with higher rates of low value care. Third, culture is likely to contribute to value. This was suggested by findings that recent medical school graduation and allopathic training were associated with reduced low value service utilization and that provider organizations had larger effects on value than did individual physicians.

Conclusions

System, hospital, provider, and community characteristics influence low value care provision. To improve health care value, strategies aiming to reduce utilization of low value services and promote high value care across various levels will be essential.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12913-022-08225-6.

Awareness of performance on outcomes after total hip and knee arthroplasty among Dutch orthopedic surgeons: how to improve feedback from arthroplasty registries

Background and purpose - The Netherlands Registry of Orthopedic Implants (LROI) uses audit and feedback (A&F) as the strategy to improve performance outcomes after total hip and knee arthroplasty (THA/TKA). Effectiveness of A&F depends on awareness of below-average performance to initiate improvement activities. We explored the awareness of Dutch orthopedic surgeons regarding their performance on outcomes after THA/TKA and factors associated with this awareness.Methods - An anonymous questionnaire was sent to all 445 eligible Dutch orthopedic surgeons performing THA/TKA. To assess awareness on own surgeon-group performance, they were asked whether their 1-year THA/TKA revision rates over the past 2 years were below average (negative outlier), average (non-outlier), above average (positive outlier) in the funnel plot on the LROI dashboard, or did not know. Associations were determined with (1) dashboard login at least once a year (yes/no); (2) correct funnel-plot interpretation (yes/no) and; (3) recall of their 1-year THA/TKA revision rate (yes/no).Results - 44% of respondents started the questionnaire, 158 THA and 156 TKA surgeons. 55% of THA surgeons and 55% of TKA surgeons were aware of their performance. Surgeons aware of their performance more often logged in on the LROI dashboard, more often interpreted funnel plots correctly, and more often recalled their revision rate. 38% of THA and 26% of TKA surgeons scored "good" on all 3 outcomes.Interpretation - Only half of the orthopedic surgeons were aware of their performance status regarding outcomes after THA/TKA. This suggests that to increase awareness, orthopedic surgeons need to be actively motivated to look at the dashboard more frequently and educated on interpretation of funnel plots for audit and feedback to be effective.

Association of Patient-reported Experiences and Surgical Outcomes Among Group Practices: Retrospective Cohort Study

OBJECTIVE

The aim of the study was to determine the association of patient-reported experiences (PREs) and risk-adjusted surgical outcomes among group practices.

BACKGROUND

The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services required large group practices to submit PREs data for successful participation in the Physician Quality Reporting System (PQRS) using the Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems for PQRS survey. Whether these PREs data correlate with perioperative outcomes remains ill defined.

METHODS

Operations between January 1, 2014 and December 31, 2016 in the American College of Surgeons' National Surgical Quality Improvement Program registry were merged with 2015 Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems for PQRS survey data. Hierarchical logistic models were constructed to estimate associations between 7 subscales and 1 composite score of PREs and 30-day morbidity, unplanned readmission, and unplanned reoperation, separately, while adjusting for patient- and procedure mix.

RESULTS

Among 328 group practices identified, patients reported their experiences with clinician communication the highest (mean ± standard deviation, 82.66 ± 3.10), and with attention to medication cost the lowest (25.96 ± 5.14). The mean composite score was 61.08 (±6.66). On multivariable analyses, better PREs scores regarding medication cost, between-visit communication, and the composite score of experience were each associated with 4% decreased odds of morbidity [odds ratio (OR) 0.96, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.92-0.99], readmission (OR 0.96, 95% CI 0.93-0.99), and reoperation (OR 0.96, 95% CI 0.93-0.99), respectively. In sensitivity analyses, better between-visit communication remained significantly associated with fewer readmissions.

CONCLUSIONS

In these data, patients' report of better between-visit communication was associated with fewer readmissions. More sensitive, surgery-specific PRE assessments may reveal additional unique insights for improving the quality of surgical care.

Between-Hospital Variation in Revision Rates After Total Hip and Knee Arthroplasty in the Netherlands: Directing Quality-Improvement Initiatives

BACKGROUND

Variation in 1-year revision rates between Dutch hospitals after primary total hip and knee arthroplasty (THA and TKA) may direct quality-improvement initiatives if this variation accurately reflects true hospital differences. The aim of the present study was to assess the extent of variation, both overall and for specific indications, as well as the statistical reliability of ranking hospitals.

METHODS

All primary THAs and TKAs that were performed between January 2014 and December 2016 were included. Observed/expected (O/E) ratios regarding 1-year revision rates were depicted in a funnel plot with 95% control limits to identify outliers based on 1 or 3 years of data, both overall and by specific indication for revision. The expected number was calculated on the basis of patient mix with use of logistic regression models. The statistical reliability of ranking hospitals (rankability) on these outcomes indicates the percentage of total variation that is explained by "true" hospital differences rather than chance. Rankability was evaluated using fixed and random effects models, for overall revisions and specific indications for revision, including 1 versus 3 years of data.

RESULTS

The present study included 86,468 THAs and 73,077 TKAs from 97 and 98 hospitals, respectively. Thirteen hospitals performing THAs were identified as negative outliers (median O/E ratio, 1.9; interquartile range [IQR], 1.5-2.5), with 5 hospitals as outliers in multiple years. Eight negative outliers were identified for periprosthetic joint infection; 4, for dislocation; and 2, for prosthesis loosening. Seven hospitals performing TKAs were identified as negative outliers (median O/E ratio, 2.3; IQR, 2.2-2.8), with 2 hospitals as outliers in multiple years. Two negative outlier hospitals were identified for periprosthetic joint infection and 1 was identified for technical failures. The rankability for overall revisions was 62% (moderate) for THA and 46% (low) for TKA.

CONCLUSIONS

There was large between-hospital variation in 1-year revision rates after primary THA and TKA. For most outlier hospitals, a specific indication for revision could be identified as contributing to worse performance, particularly for THA; these findings are starting points for quality-improvement initiatives.

Combining Surgical Outcomes and Patient Experiences to Evaluate Hospital Gastrointestinal Cancer Surgery Quality

BACKGROUND

Assessments of surgical quality should consider both surgeon and patient perspectives simultaneously. Focusing on patients undergoing major gastrointestinal cancer surgery, we sought to characterize hospitals, and their patients, on both these axes of quality.

METHODS

Using the American College of Surgeons' National Surgical Quality Improvement Program registry, hospitals were profiled on a risk-adjusted composite measure of death or serious morbidity (DSM) generated from patients who underwent colectomy, esophagectomy, hepatectomy, pancreatectomy, or proctectomy for cancer between January 1, 2015 and December 31, 2016. These hospitals were also profiled using the Hospital Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (HCAHPS) survey. Highest-performing hospitals on both quality axes, and their respective patients, were compared to the lowest-performing hospitals.

RESULTS

Overall, 60,526 patients underwent their cancer operation at 530 hospitals. There were 38 highest- and 48 lowest-performing hospitals. The correlation between quality axes was poor (ρ = 0.10). Compared to the lowest-performing hospitals, the highest-performing hospitals were more often NCI-designated cancer centers (29.0% vs. 4.2%, p = 0.002) and cared for a lower proportion of Medicaid patients (0.14 vs. 0.23, p < 0.001). Patients who had their operations at the lowest- versus highest-performing hospitals were more often black (17.2% vs. 8.4%, p < 0.001), Hispanic (8.3% vs. 3.5%, p < 0.001), functionally dependent (3.8% vs. 0.9%, p < 0.001), and not admitted from home (4.4% vs. 2.4%, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Hospital performance varied when assessed by both risk-adjusted surgical outcomes and patient experiences. In this study, poor-performing hospitals appeared to be disproportionately serving disadvantaged and minority cancer patients.