Measuring patient satisfaction in acute care hospitals: nationwide monitoring in Switzerland

The National Association for Quality Development in Hospitals and Clinics (ANQ) has conducted patient satisfaction measurements in the inpatient sector in Switzerland since 2009. Specifically designed for this measurement, an instrument consisting of five questions was evaluated on an 11-point rating scale. Nevertheless, the instrument showed substantial ceiling effects, which did not allow for hospital discrimination. Therefore, ANQ initiated a revision testing different scales in a pilot study. The results showed that a 5-point verbal scale displayed good psychometric properties. Compared to the 7- or 11-point scales, the 5-point verbal scale exhibited reduced ceiling effects, which was more appropriate to compare hospitals. For the national public reporting of hospitals and clinics, risk adjustment by age and self-reported health status was recommended, which was not the case for gender, principal diagnosis, type of admission and insurance status.

[Opportunities and limitations of risk adjustment of quality indicators based on inpatient administrative health data - a workshop report]

INTRODUCTION

The quality indicators of the Initiative Qualitätsmedizin e. V. (IQM) have been developed as triggers to examine treatment processes for opportunities for improvement. Published quality results have partly been used for external quality comparisons in the media. Therefore, member hospitals of IQM demanded to investigate if methods of risk adjustment should be applied in the calculation of the quality indicators. After a hearing of experts had been held, a task force was founded to conduct test calculations on risk adjustment methods.

METHODS

Specific risk adjustment models for mortality in myocardial infarction, heart failure, stroke, pneumonia, and colectomy in colorectal cancer were developed in the database of national German DRG data of the year 2016. These models were used to calculate standardized mortality ratios (SMR) per indicator in a sample of 172 member hospitals of IQM based on the data of the year 2018. Median SMR per indicator were compared to median SMR based on a standardization by age and gender, which is the standard procedure in IQM. Correlations between the different SMR were calculated. Quality of care was judged by two different approaches: a) a descriptive discrepancy of |0.1| from the SMR value of 1, and b) a significant discrepancy from 1 using the 95% confidence limits. The effect of using the specific risk adjustment in relation to the standard procedure was investigated for both approaches (a and b).

RESULTS

The specific risk adjustment methods showed an area under the curve between 0.72 and 0.84. The median differences between the SMR based on standardization by age and gender and the SMR based on specific risk adjustment were small (between 0 and 0.4); Spearman's correlations were between 0.90 and 0.99. Changes in the judgement of quality of care in comparison to the national average occurred in 3.9% (mortality from pneumonia) to 20.6% of the hospitals (mortality from heart failure) in descriptive comparisons. When the judgement was based on confidence limits changes were observed in 1.6% (mortality after colectomy) to 17.4% of the hospitals (mortality from heart failure).

DISCUSSION

Implementing specific risk adjustment models had only minor effects on the distribution of risk-adjusted mortality compared to the standard procedure, but the judgement of quality of care could change for a fifth of the hospitals in individual indicators. Concerning methodological and practical reasons, the task force recommends further development of risk adjustment methods for selected indicators. This should be accompanied by studies on the validity of inpatient administrative data for quality management as well as by efforts to improve the usefulness of these data for such purposes.

[For discussion: Quality assurance in medical care - is PKMS the right way to go?]

Hospitals are legally obliged to take part in external comparative quality assurance programs. Quality indicators for pressure ulcer prevention are among the most widely used for geriatric clinical institutions. To enable more precise risk adjustment established risk factors are employed in conjunction with the OPS 9-200. Using a PKMS case to produce an OPS 9-200 is far too heterogeneous, sketchy and vague to create an accurate and satisfactory pressure ulcer risk assessment for patients with varied and individual case factors. Therefore we propose to include risk factors which, according to experts, are clearly and specifically related to pressure ulcers (e.g. immobility and incontinence) and matched by unique ICD codes.

[Potentials of cooperative quality management initiatives: BQS Institute projects, January 2010 - July 2013]

Alongside the projects of internal quality management and mandatory quality assurance there is a variety of quality driven projects across institutions initiated and run by various partners to continuously improve the quality of care. The multiplicity and characteristics of these projects are discussed on the basis of projects run by the BQS Institute between 2010 and 2013. In addition, useful interactions and linking with mandatory quality benchmarking and with internal quality management are discussed. (As supplied by publisher).