Publication of Quality Report Cards and Trends in Reported Quality Measures in Nursing Homes
Objective. To examine associations between nursing homes' quality and publication of the Nursing Home Compare quality report card. Data Sources/Study Settings. Primary and secondary data for 2001–2003: 701 survey responses of a random sample of nursing homes; the Minimum Data Set (MDS) with inf...
Saved in:
Published in: | Health services research Vol. 43; no. 4; pp. 1244 - 1262 |
---|---|
Main Authors: | , , , , |
Format: | Journal Article |
Language: | English |
Published: |
Malden, USA
Blackwell Publishing Inc
01-08-2008
Health Research and Educational Trust Blackwell Publishing Ltd Blackwell Science Inc |
Subjects: | |
Online Access: | Get full text |
Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
Summary: | Objective. To examine associations between nursing homes' quality and publication of the Nursing Home Compare quality report card.
Data Sources/Study Settings. Primary and secondary data for 2001–2003: 701 survey responses of a random sample of nursing homes; the Minimum Data Set (MDS) with information about all residents in these facilities, and the Nursing Home Compare published quality measure (QM) scores.
Study Design. Survey responses provided information on 20 specific actions taken by nursing homes in response to publication of the report card. MDS data were used to calculate five QMs for each quarter, covering a period before and following publication of the report. Statistical regression techniques were used to determine if trends in these QMs have changed following publication of the report card in relation to actions undertaken by nursing homes.
Principal Findings. Two of the five QMs show improvement following publication. Several specific actions were associated with these improvements.
Conclusions. Publication of the Nursing Home Compare report card was associated with improvement in some but not all reported dimensions of quality. This suggests that report cards may motivate providers to improve quality, but it also raises questions as to why it was not effective across the board. |
---|---|
Bibliography: | ArticleID:HESR829 istex:75DA42909CA2FF2B85ADB7AA06C3B32858B4E920 ark:/67375/WNG-2FLCVL0N-S Address correspondence to Dana B. Mukamel, Ph.D., Professor and Senior Fellow, Center for Health Policy Research, 111 Academy, University of California, Suite 220, Irvine, CA 92697‐5800. David L. Weimer, Ph.D., Professor, is with the LaFollette School of Public Affairs, University of Wisconsin—Madison, Madison, WI. William D. Spector, Ph.D., Senior Social Scientist, is with the Agency for Healthcare Research & Quality, Rockville, MD. Heather Ladd, M.S., is with the Center for Health Policy Research, 111 Academy, University of California, Irvine, CA. Jacqueline S. Zinn, Ph.D., Professor, is with Temple University, Philadelphia, PA. ObjectType-Article-1 SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1 ObjectType-Feature-2 content type line 23 |
ISSN: | 0017-9124 1475-6773 |
DOI: | 10.1111/j.1475-6773.2007.00829.x |