Do Report Cards Influence Hospital Choice? The Case of Kidney Transplantation

Overview

Journal Inquiry

Specialties Health Services
Public Health

Date 2006 Sep 29

PMID 17004644

Citations 15

Authors

David H Howard

Bruce Kaplan

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

The national program to report hospital-level outcomes for transplantation has been in place since 1991, yet it has not been addressed in the existing literature on hospital report cards. We study the impact of reported outcomes on demand at kidney transplant centers. Using a negative binomial regression with hospital fixed effects, we estimate the number of patients choosing each center as a function of reported outcomes. Parameters are identified by the within-hospital variation in outcomes over five successive report cards. We find some evidence that report cards influence younger and college-educated patients, but, overall, report cards do not affect demand.

Citing Articles

Designing a patient-specific search of transplant program performance and outcomes: Feedback from heart transplant candidates and recipients.

McKinney W, Schaffhausen C, Schladt D, Bruin M, Chu S, Snyder J Clin Transplant. 2021; 35(2):e14183.

PMID: 33617066 PMC: 8023766. DOI: 10.1111/ctr.14183.

Patient selection in the presence of regulatory oversight based on healthcare report cards of providers: the case of organ transplantation.

Ouayogode M, Schnier K Health Care Manag Sci. 2021; 24(1):160-184.

PMID: 33417173 PMC: 7791538. DOI: 10.1007/s10729-020-09530-4.

Development of a Patient-specific Search of Transplant Program Outcomes and Characteristics: Feedback From Kidney Transplant Patients.

McKinney W, Schaffhausen C, Bruin M, Chu S, Schladt D, Matas A Transplant Direct. 2020; 6(8):e585.

PMID: 32766433 PMC: 7371071. DOI: 10.1097/TXD.0000000000001036.

Transplant community perceptions of the benefits and drawbacks of alternative quality metrics for regulation.

Van Pilsum Rasmussen S, Zhou S, Thomas A, Segev D, Nicholas L Clin Transplant. 2019; 33(4):e13500.

PMID: 30773685 PMC: 6465095. DOI: 10.1111/ctr.13500.

Hospital Choice for Cataract Treatments: The Winner Takes Most.

Ruwaard S, Douven R Int J Health Policy Manag. 2019; 7(12):1120-1129.

PMID: 30709087 PMC: 6358653. DOI: 10.15171/ijhpm.2018.77.

References

Bentley J, Nash D . How Pennsylvania hospitals have responded to publicly released reports on coronary artery bypass graft surgery. Jt Comm J Qual Improv. 1998; 24(1):40-9. DOI: 10.1016/s1070-3241(16)30358-3. View

Mukamel D, Mushlin A . The impact of quality report cards on choice of physicians, hospitals, and HMOs: a midcourse evaluation. Jt Comm J Qual Improv. 2001; 27(1):20-7. DOI: 10.1016/s1070-3241(01)27003-5. View

Marshall M, Shekelle P, Leatherman S, Brook R . The public release of performance data: what do we expect to gain? A review of the evidence. JAMA. 2000; 283(14):1866-74. DOI: 10.1001/jama.283.14.1866. View

Schneider E, Epstein A . Use of public performance reports: a survey of patients undergoing cardiac surgery. JAMA. 1998; 279(20):1638-42. DOI: 10.1001/jama.279.20.1638. View

Mukamel D, Mushlin A . Quality of 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(7):945-54. DOI: 10.1097/00005650-199807000-00002. View

Mukamel D, Weimer D, Zwanziger J, Gorthy S, Mushlin A . Quality report cards, selection of cardiac surgeons, and racial disparities: a study of the publication of the New York State Cardiac Surgery Reports. Inquiry. 2005; 41(4):435-46. DOI: 10.5034/inquiryjrnl_41.4.435. View

Schauffler H, Mordavsky J . Consumer reports in health care: do they make a difference?. Annu Rev Public Health. 2001; 22:69-89. DOI: 10.1146/annurev.publhealth.22.1.69. View

Werner R, Asch D . The unintended consequences of publicly reporting quality information. JAMA. 2005; 293(10):1239-44. DOI: 10.1001/jama.293.10.1239. View

Mennemeyer S, Morrisey M, Howard L . Death and reputation: how consumers acted upon HCFA mortality information. Inquiry. 1997; 34(2):117-28. View

10.

Romano P, Zhou H . Do well-publicized risk-adjusted outcomes reports affect hospital volume?. Med Care. 2004; 42(4):367-77. DOI: 10.1097/01.mlr.0000118872.33251.11. View

11.

. Organ procurement and transplantation network. Final rule. Fed Regist. 2007; 72(46):10616-9. View

12.

Chassin M . Achieving and sustaining improved quality: lessons from New York State and cardiac surgery. Health Aff (Millwood). 2002; 21(4):40-51. DOI: 10.1377/hlthaff.21.4.40. View

13.

Vladeck B, Goodwin E, Myers L, Sinisi M . Consumers and hospital use: the HCFA "death list". Health Aff (Millwood). 1988; 7(1):122-5. DOI: 10.1377/hlthaff.7.1.122. View

14.

Hibbard J, Jewett J . Will quality report cards help consumers?. Health Aff (Millwood). 1997; 16(3):218-28. DOI: 10.1377/hlthaff.16.3.218. View

15.

Palmer R . Securing health care quality for Medicare. Health Aff (Millwood). 1995; 14(4):89-100. DOI: 10.1377/hlthaff.14.4.89. View

16.

Baker D, Einstadter D, Thomas C, Husak S, Gordon N, Cebul R . Mortality trends during a program that publicly reported hospital performance. Med Care. 2002; 40(10):879-90. DOI: 10.1097/00005650-200210000-00006. View

17.

Hibbard J, Peters E, Slovic P, Finucane M, Tusler M . Making health care quality reports easier to use. Jt Comm J Qual Improv. 2001; 27(11):591-604. DOI: 10.1016/s1070-3241(01)27051-5. View

18.

Howard D . Quality and Consumer Choice in Healthcare: Evidence from Kidney Transplantation. Top Econ Anal Policy. 2008; 5(1):1349. PMC: 2408385. DOI: 10.2202/1538-0653.1349. View

19.

Hannan E, Kilburn Jr H, Racz M, Shields E, Chassin M . Improving the outcomes of coronary artery bypass surgery in New York State. JAMA. 1994; 271(10):761-6. View

20.

Wicks E, Meyer J . Making report cards work. Health Aff (Millwood). 1999; 18(2):152-5. DOI: 10.1377/hlthaff.18.2.152. View