Patterns of performance and improvement in US Medicare’s Hospital Star Ratings, 2016–2017

2018 ◽  
Vol 28 (6) ◽  
pp. 486-494 ◽  
Author(s):  
Paula Chatterjee ◽  
Karen Joynt Maddox

BackgroundPublicly reported quality data can help consumers make informed choices about where to seek medical care. The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services developed a composite Hospital Compare Overall Star Rating for US acute-care hospitals in 2016. However, patterns of performance and improvement have not been previously described.ObjectiveTo characterise high-quality and low-quality hospitals as assessed by Star Ratings.DesignWe performed a retrospective cross-sectional study of 3429 US acute-care hospitals assigned Overall Star Ratings in both 2016 and 2017. We used multivariable logistic regression models to identify characteristics associated with receiving 4 or 5 stars.ResultsSmall hospitals were more likely to receive 4 or 5 stars in 2016 (33% of small hospitals, 26% of medium hospitals and 21% of large hospitals, OR for medium 0.78, p=0.02, and for large, 0.61, p=0.003). Non-profit status (OR 1.37, p=0.01), midwest region (OR=2.30, p<0.001), west region (OR 1.30 in 2016, p=0.06) and system membership (OR 1.33, p=0.003) were associated with higher odds of achieving a higher Star Rating. Hospitals with the most Medicaid patients were markedly less likely to receive 4 or 5 stars (OR for highest quartile=0.32, p<0.001), and hospitals with the highest proportion of Medicare patients were somewhat less likely to do so (OR for highest quartile=0.68, p=0.01). These associations remained largely consistent over the first two years of reporting and were also associated with the highest likelihood of improvement.ConclusionsSmall hospitals with fewer Medicaid patients had the highest odds of performing well on Star Ratings. Further monitoring of these trends is needed as patients, clinicians and policymakers strive to use this information to promote high-quality care.

Author(s):  
Darja Jarošová ◽  
Elena Gurková ◽  
Renáta Zeleníková ◽  
Ilona Plevová ◽  
Eva Janíková

2021 ◽  
Vol 74 (4) ◽  
Author(s):  
Tamara Lopes Terto ◽  
Thales Philipe Rodrigues da Silva ◽  
Thamara Gabriela Fernandes Viana ◽  
Ana Maria Magalhães Sousa ◽  
Eunice Francisca Martins ◽  
...  

ABSTRACT Objective: Evaluate the association between early pregnant hospitalization and the use of obstetric interventions and cesarean delivery route. Methods: Cross-sectional study, with 758 women selected at the time of childbirth. It was assumed as early hospitalization when the woman was admitted to the hospital having less than 6 cm of cervical dilation. Logistic regression models were constructed in order to estimate the odds ratio for each obstetric intervention, adjusted by sociodemographic and obstetric variables. Results: 73.22% of women were early hospitalized. On average, they had 1.97 times the chance to undergo Kristeller’s maneuver, 2.59 and 1.80 times the chance to receive oxytocin infusion and analgesia, respectively, and 8 times more chances to having their children by cesarean delivery when compared to women that had timely hospitalization. Conclusion: Early hospitalized women were submitted to a higher number of obstetric intervention and had increased chances of undergoing cesarean sections.


2017 ◽  
Vol 18 (2) ◽  
pp. 276-285 ◽  
Author(s):  
Pei-Chao Lin ◽  
Mei-Hui Hsieh ◽  
Meng-Chin Chen ◽  
Yung-Mei Yang ◽  
Li-Chan Lin

2022 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Kanako Yamamoto ◽  
Yuki Yonekura ◽  
Kazuhiro Nakayama

Abstract Background In acute-care hospitals, patients treated in an ICU for surgical reasons or sudden deterioration are treated in an outpatient ward, ICU, and other multiple departments. It is unclear how healthcare providers are initiating advance care planning (ACP) for such patients and assisting them with it. The purpose of this study is to clarify healthcare providers’ perceptions of the ACP support provided to patients receiving critical care in acute-care hospitals. Methods A cross-sectional study was conducted using questionnaires. In this study, 400 acute-care hospitals with ICUs in Japan were randomly selected, and 1490 subjects, including intensivists, surgeons, ICU nurses, surgical floor nurses, and surgical outpatient nurses, participated. Survey items examined whether ICU patients received ACP support, the participants’ degree of confidence in providing ACP support, the patients’ treatment preferences, and the decision-making process, and whether any discussion was conducted on change of values. Results Responses were obtained from 598 participants from 157 hospitals, 41.4% of which reportedly supported ACP provision to ICU patients. The subjects with the highest level of ACP understanding were surgeons (45.8%), and differences in understanding were observed across specialties (P < 0.001). Among the respondents, physicians and nurses expressed high levels of confidence in providing ACP support to patients requiring critical care. However, 15.2% of all the subjects mentioned that they would not attempt to resuscitate the patients. In addition, 25.7% of the participants handed over patients’ values to other departments or hospitals, whereas 25.3% handed over the decision-making process. Conclusions Among the participating hospitals, 40% provided ACP support to patients receiving critical care. The low number is possibly because support providers lack understanding of the content of patients’ ACP or about how to support and use ACP. Second, it is sometimes too late to start providing ACP support after ICU admission. Third, healthcare providers differ in their perception of ACP, widely considered an ambiguous concept. Finally, in acute-care hospitals with different healthcare settings, it is necessary to confirm and integrate the changes in feelings and thoughts of patients.


2019 ◽  
Vol 4 (2) ◽  
pp. e001078 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sumiyo Okawa ◽  
Hla Hla Win ◽  
Hannah H Leslie ◽  
Keiko Nanishi ◽  
Akira Shibanuma ◽  
...  

IntroductionAccess to maternal and newborn healthcare has improved in Myanmar. However, regular contact with skilled care providers does not necessarily result in quality care. We assessed adequate contact made by women and newborns with skilled care providers, reception of high-quality care and quality-adjusted contacts during antenatal care (ANC), peripartum care (PPC) and postnatal care (PNC) in Myanmar.MethodsThis cross-sectional study was conducted in a predominantly urban township of Yangon and a predominantly rural township of Ayeyawady in March 2016. We collected data from 1500 women. We measured quality-adjusted contact, which refers to adequate contact with high-quality care, as follows: ≥4 ANC contacts and receiving 11–14 of 14 intervention items; facility-based delivery assisted by skilled care providers, receiving 7 of 7 PPC intervention items; and receiving the first PNC contact ≤24 hours postpartum and ≥2 additional contacts, and receiving 16–17 of 17 intervention items. Using multilevel logistic regression analysis with a random intercept at cluster level, we identified factors associated with adequate contact and high-quality ANC, PPC and PNC.ResultsThe percentage of crude adequate contact was 60.9% for ANC, 61.3% for PPC and 11.5% for PNC. However, the percentage of quality-adjusted contact was 14.6% for ANC, 15.2% for PPC and 3.6% for PNC. Adequate contact was associated with receiving high-quality care at ANC, PPC and PNC. Being a teenager, low educational level, multiparity and low level in the household wealth index were negatively associated with adequate contact with healthcare providers for ANC and PPC. Receiving a maternal and child health handbook was positively associated with adequate contact for ANC and PPC, and with receiving high-quality ANC, PPC and PNC.ConclusionWomen and newborns do not receive quality care during contact with skilled care providers in Myanmar. Continuity and quality of maternal and newborn care programmes must be improved.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
KANAKO YAMAMOTO

Abstract BackgroundIt is unclear how healthcare providers provide advance care plans (ACPs) support to the patients treated in ICUs. The purpose of this study is to clarify healthcare providers’ perceptions of the ACPs support provided to patients receiving critical care in acute-care hospitals.MethodsA cross-sectional study was conducted using questionnaires. In this study, 400 acute-care hospitals with ICUs in Japan were randomly selected, and 1490 subjects, including intensivists, surgeons, ICU nurses, surgical floor nurses, and surgical outpatient nurses, participated. Survey items examined whether ICU patients received ACPS support, the participants’ degree of confidence in providing ACPS support, the patients’ treatment preferences and the decision-making process, and whether there was any discussion on and succession of values.ResultsResponses were obtained from 598 participants from 157 hospitals. Sixty-five hospitals (41.4%) reportedly supported ACPs provision to ICU patients. The subjects with the highest level of ACPs understanding were surgeons, 27 out of 59 (45.8%), and differences in understanding were observed across specialties (p < 0.001). Among the respondents, physicians and nurses expressed high levels of confidence in providing ACPs support to patients requiring critical care. However, 15.2% of all the subjects mentioned that they would not attempt to resuscitate the patients. In addition, 25.7% of the participants handed over patients’ values to other departments or hospitals, whereas 25.3% handed over the decision-making process.ConclusionsAmong the participating hospitals, 40% provided ACPs support to patients receiving critical care. This is probably because support providers lack ACPs knowledge and it is sometimes too late to start providing ACPs support after ICU admission. In addition, the perception of ACPs, widely considered an ambiguous concept, differs among healthcare providers. Finally, in acute-care hospitals with different healthcare settings, it is necessary to confirm and integrate the changes in feelings and thoughts of patients’ family members and healthcare providers.


2013 ◽  
Vol 50 (2) ◽  
pp. 230-239 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maria Schubert ◽  
Dietmar Ausserhofer ◽  
Mario Desmedt ◽  
René Schwendimann ◽  
Emmanuel Lesaffre ◽  
...  

2021 ◽  
Vol 9 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yufang Sun ◽  
Xiaohong Chen ◽  
Min Cao ◽  
Tao Xiang ◽  
Jimei Zhang ◽  
...  

Objective: The Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine is currently available. This timely survey was conducted to provide insight into on the willingness of healthcare workers (HCWs)to receive the vaccine and determine the influencing factors.Methods: This was a cross-sectional online survey. An online questionnaire was provided to all participants and they were asked if they would accept a free vaccine. The questionnaire gathered general demographic information, and included the General Health Questionnaire (GHQ-12); Myers-Briggs Type Indicator questionnaire (MBTI); Depression, Anxiety, and Stress Scales (DASS-21); and the 12-item Short Form Health Survey (SF-12). The data were collected automatically and electronically. Univariate analysis was done between all the variables and our dependent variable. Multivariable logistic regression models were employed to examine and identify the associations between the acceptance of the COVID-19 vaccine with the associated variables.Results: We collected 505 complete answers. The participants included 269 nurses (53.27%), 206 clinicians (40.79%), 15 administrative staff (2.97%), and 15 other staff (2.97%). Of these, 76.63% declared they would accept the vaccine. The major barriers were concerns about safety, effectiveness, and the rapid mutation in the virus. Moreover, four factors were significantly associated with the willingness to receive the vaccine: (a) “understanding of the vaccine” (odds ratio (OR):2.322; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.355 to 3.979); (b) “worried about experiencing COVID-19” (OR 1.987; 95% CI: 1.197–3.298); (c) “flu vaccination in 2020” (OR 4.730; 95% CI: 2.285 to 9.794); and (d) “living with elderly individuals” (OR 1.928; 95% CI: 1.074–3.462).Conclusions: During the vaccination period, there was still hesitation in receiving the vaccine. The results will provide a rationale for the design of future vaccination campaigns and education efforts concerning the vaccine.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document