Health care results diffusion: Advantages and disadvantages of "report cards";Difusión de resultados asistenciales: Ventajas e inconvenientes de los report cards

Revista de Calidad Asistencial

Volumn 18, Issue 4, 2003, Pages 209-224

  Mira, José Joaquín ^a   Lorenzo, Susana ^b   Martínez Sanz, Alicia ^a  

^a MIGUEL HERNÁNDEZ UNIVERSITY   (Spain)

^b HOSPITAL UNIVERSITARIO FUNDACIÓN ALCORCÓN   (Spain)

Author keywords

Consumer evaluation; Public accountability; Quality of care measurement; Report cards

Indexed keywords

CONSUMER; DECISION MAKING; HEALTH CARE PLANNING; HEALTH CARE POLICY; HEALTH CARE QUALITY; MANAGED CARE; OUTCOMES RESEARCH; PATIENT SATISFACTION; PUBLIC HEALTH; RELIABILITY; REVIEW; SCORING SYSTEM;

EID: 0042668576     PISSN: 1134282X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/s1134-282x(03)77606-4     Document Type: Review

References (60)

1. Mira JJ, Buil JA, Lorenzo S, Sitges E, Aranaz J. Márketing de servicios en la organización sanitaria: Una herramienta para la mejora de la calidad de la asistencia. Cir Esp 2000;67:180-3.
2. Kassier JP. Incorporating patients' preferences into medical decisions. N Engl J Med 1994;330:1895-6.
3. Mira JJ, Rodríguez-Marín J. Análisis de las condiciones en las que los pacientes toman decisiones responsables. Med Clin (Barc) 2001;116:104-10.
4. Marshall MN, Hisock J, Sibbaud B. Attitudes to the public release of comparative information on the quality of general practice care: qualitative study. BMJ 2002;325:1278-83.
5. Nutley S, Smith P. League tables for performance improvement in health care. J Health Serv Res Policy 1998;3:50-7.
6. Medicare Hospital Mortality Information, 1986. Washington, DC: US Dept of Health an Human Servicies, 1987. Publication 01-002.
7. Wicks EK, Meyer JA. Making report cards work. Health Affairs 1999;18:152-5.
8. Fielding JE, Sutherland CE, Halfon N. Comunity health report cards. Am J Preventive Med 1999;17:7986.
9. Davies HTO. Public release of performance data and quality improvement: internal responses to external data by US health care providers. Quality Health Care 2001;10:104-10.
10. Thompson JW, Bost J, Ahmed F, Ingalls CE, Sennet C. The NCQA quality compass: evaluating managed care in the United Estates. Health Affairs 1998;17:152-8.
11. Fowles JB, Kind EA, Braun BL, Knutson DJ. Consumers responses to health plan report cards in two markets. Med Care 2000;38:469-81.
12. Marshall MN, Shekekke P, Leatherman S, Brook RH. What do we expect to gain from the public release of performance data? A review of the evidence. JAMA 2000;283:1866-74.
13. O'Malley S. Report cards: how relevant are they for patients? The Quality Letter 1997;12-5.
14. Hibbard JH, Jewett JJ. What type or quality information do consumers want in a health care report cards? Med Care 1996;53:28-47.
15. Hibbard JH, Jewet JJ. Will quality report cards help consumers? Health Affairs 1997;16:218-28.
16. Hibbard JH. Use outcomes data by purchases and consumers: new strategies and new dilemmas. Internacional J Quality Health Care 1998;10:503-8.
17. Hochhauser M. Why patients have little patience for report cards. Managed Care 1998:34-31.
18. Edhman-Levitan S, Cleary PD. What information do consumers want and need? Health Affairs 1996;15:41-56.
19. Hibbard JH. Choosing health plan: do large employers use the data? Health Affairs 1997;16:172-80.
20. Davies HTO. Performance management using health outcomes: in search of instrumentality. J Evaluation Clin Pract 4:359-62.
21. Hibbard JH, Harris-Jojetin L, Mullin JL, Garfinkel. Increasing the impact on health plan report cards by addressing consumers' concerns. Health Affairs 2000;19:138-43.
22. Hibbard JH, Slovic P, Peters E, Finucane ML. Strategies for reporting health plan performance information to consumers: evidence from controlled studies. Health Services Res 2002;37:291-313.
23. Ireson CI, Ford MA, Hower J, Schwatz RW. Outcome report cards. Arch Surg 2002;137:46-51.
24. Davies HTO, Crombie K. Interpreting health outcomes. J Evaluation Clin Pract 1997;3:187-99.
25. Rainwater JA, Romano PS, Antonius DM. The California Hospital Outcomes Proyect: How Useful Is California's Report Card for Quality Improvement. J Quality Improv 1998;24:31-9.
26. Hofer TP, Hayward RA, Greenfield S, Wagner EH, Kaplan SH, Manning WG. The unreliability of individual physician "report cards" for assessing the costs and quality of care of a chronic disease. JAMA 1999;281:2098-105.
27. Davies HTO, Washington AE, Bindman AB. Health care report cards: implications for vulnerable patient groups and the organizations Providing them care. J Health Polit Policy Law 2002;27:379-99.
28. Josephson MD, Agger AW, Bennett CL, Ullman M, Arnow PM. Performance measurement in neumonia care: beyond report cards. Mayo Clin Proc 1998;73:5-9.
29. Poses RM, Berlin JA, Noveck H, Lawrence VA, Spence RK, Duff A, et al. How you look determines what you find: seven of illness and variation in blood transfusion for hip fracture. Am J Med 1998;105:198-206.
30. Chen J, Radford MJ, Wang Y, Marciniak TA, Krumholz HM. Performance of the "100 top hospitals": what does the report card report? Health Affairs 1999;18:53-68.
31. Saaddine JB, Engelgau MM, Beckles G, Gregg E, Thompson TJ, Venkat KM. A diabetes report card for the United States: quality of care in the 1990s. An Intern Med 2002;136:565-74.
32. Epstein AM. Roling down the runway. The challenges ahead for quality reports cards. JAMA 1998;279:1691-6.
33. Dans PE. Caveat doctor: how to analyze claims-based report cards. J Qual Improv 1998;24:21-30.
34. Peiró S, Lorenzo S. La difusión a los ciudadanos de los resultados de la asistencia sanitaria. Rev Calidad Asistencial 2000;15:391-3.
35. Sainz A, Humet C. Jornada INSALUD-Sociedad Española de Calidad Asistencial 2000. Rev Calidad Asistencial 2000;15:448-51.
36. Kaplan JG, Bauers JC, Beloff S, Tidall WN. Managed care report cards: evaluating tose who evaluate physician. Managed Care Interface 2000:88-94.
37. Sokorin R. Alternative explanations for poor report card performance. Eff Clin Pract 2000;3:25-30.
38. Chassin MR, Hannan EL, DeBuono BA. Benefits and hazards of reporting medical outcomes publicly. N Engl J Med 1996;334:394-8.
39. Greene J, Wintfield N. Report cards on cardiac surgeons: assessing New York State's approach. N Engl J Med 1996;332:1229-32.
40. McGlynn EA. The outcomes utility index: will outcomes data tell us what we want to know? Int J Qual Health Care 1998;10:485-90.
41. Tu JV, Schull MJ, Ferris LE, Hux JE, Redelmeter DA. Problems for clinical judgement: 4. Surviving in the report cards era. CMAJ 2001;164:1709-12.
42. Mukamel DB, Mushlin AI. Quality of care information makes a difference An analysis of market share and price changes after publication of the New York State Cardiac Sugery Mortality Reports. Med Care 1997;36:945-54.
43. Isaac SL. Consumers' information needs: results of a National Survey. Health Affairs 1996;15:31-41.
44. Edgman S, Cleary PD. What information do consumers want and need? Health Affairs 1996;15:42-56.
45. Solodky C, Chen H, Jones P, Katcher W, Neuhauser D. Patients as partners in clinical research. Med Care 1998;36: AS13-20.
46. Nerena DR. Using outcomes data to compare plans, networks, and providers: what is he state or the art? Int J Qual Health Care 1998;10:463-5.
47. Lansky D. Measuring what matters to the public. Health Aff (Millwood) 1998;17:40-1.
48. Kim CS, Kristopaitis RJ, Stone E, Pelter M, Sandu M, Weingarten SR. Physician education and report cards: do the make the grade? Results from a randomised controlled trial. Am J Med 1999;107:556-60.
49. Davies HTO, Washington AE, Bindman AB. Health care report cards: implications for vulnerable patient groups and the organizations providing them care. J Health Polit Policy Law 2002;27:379-99.
50. Thompson R, Bowling A, Moss F. Engagiong patients in decisions: a challenge to health care delivery abnd public health. Qual Health Care 2001;10(Suppl 1):i1.
51. Crawford MJ, Rutter D, Manley C, Weaver T, Bhui K, Fulop N, et al. Systematic review of involving patients in the planning and development of health care. BMJ 2002;325:1263-8.
52. Meneu R. Top be or not top be. Rev Calidad Asistencial 2001;16:83-5.
53. García-Eroles L, Illa C, Arias A, Casas M. Los top 20 2000: objetivos, ventajas y limitaciones del método. Rev Calidad Asistencial 2001;16:107-18.
54. Peiró S. Los mejores hospitales. Entre la necesidad de información comparativa y la confusión. Rev Calidad Asistencial 2001;16:119-30.
55. Levknecht L, Schriefer J, Schriefer J, Maconis B. Combining case management, pathways, and report cards for secondary cardiac prevention. J Qual Improv 1997;23:162-74.
56. Peterson E, DeLong E, Muhlbaier L, Rosen A, Buell H, Kiefe C, et al. Challenges in comparing risk-adjusted bypass surgery mortality results. J Am Coll Cardiol 2000;36:2174-84.
57. Lezzoni L. The risks of risk adjustment. JAMA 1997;19:1600-7.
58. Schneider EC, Leiberman T. Publicly disclosed information about the quality of health care: response of the US public. Qual Health Care 2001;10:96-103.
59. Schneider EC, Epstein AM. Use of the public performance reports. JAMA 1998;279:1238-42.
60. Mukamel DB, Mushin AL. Quality care information makes a difference. An analysis of market share and price changes after publication of the New York State cardiac surgery mortality reports. Med Care 1998;36:945-54.