Reporting Hospital Quality from the Patient Perspective: Integrating HCAHPS into Hospital Compare

1
Reporting Hospital Quality from the Patient
Perspective Integrating HCAHPS into Hospital
Compare

• David J. Miranda, PhD, CMS
• Kristin Carman, PhD, AIR
• Jeanne McGee, PhD,
• McGee Evers Consulting, Inc.

AcademyHealth Research Meeting Orlando,
Florida June 4, 2007
2
Outline of Presentation

• Background
• Research Questions
• Methods
• Results Discussion

3
Background

• HCAHPS developed
• By research consortium under grant from Agency
  for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ)
• To let patients tell what only they can
• To inform other patients about what they want to
  know should know

4
Hospital Compare--Homepagewww.hospitalcompare.hhs
.gov
5
(No Transcript)
6
(No Transcript)
7
(No Transcript)
8
Research Questions (1)

• How to integrate patient
• perspectives of care data to a
• website that currently has very
• different data?
• HCAHPS is from patients
• Other data is about clinical procedures or
  outcomes
• HCAHPS is hospital wide
• The other measures are condition-specific

9
Research Questions (2)

• The HCAHPS survey was developed to meet the needs
  of consumersso we assumed consumers will be more
  interested in HCAHPS than clinical
• How can the public reporting of HCAHPS be used to
  foster interest in and educate consumers about
  other aspects of quality (outcomes, standards of
  care)?

10
Research Challenges

• Can a single website do all this
• Interest educate consumers in quality
  (including what other patients can tell them
  about quality)
• Promote informed healthcare choices
• Address concerns physicians have about quality
  measurement and patient survey data, and
• Provide useful feedback to Hospitals for QI?

11
Methods

• 3 rounds of website audience testing
• Three locations
• Subjects MDs, RNs, caregivers patients
• Review by Stakeholder workgroup
• Iterative revisions of mock-ups of displays and
  text

12
Results Discussion

• Key Themes
• Clean and quiet 1 composite?
• Patients want to know about their condition
• Stating who is excluded draws undue attention

13
Results Discussion (continued)

• Key Themes (continued)
• MDs Thats critical for QI vs. Its too
  subjective
• Once MDs see actual HCAHPS composites or
  questions, Some recognize its value

14
Results Discussion (continued)

• Key Themes (continued)
• Customized sorting might have benefits over
  static performance-based sorting (rank
  ordering)
• Default of performance-based sorting helps
  understanding
• A high priorities is a print out of all quality
  data and characteristics of each hospital of
  interest

15
Contact Information

• David J. Miranda, Ph.D.
• Social Science Research Analyst
• CMS Center for Beneficiary Choices
• 7500 Security Boulevard
• Woodlawn, MD 21244
• 410-786-7819
• david.miranda_at_cms.hhs.gov