Dissecting Leapfrog: How Well Do Leapfrog Safe Practices Scores Correlate With Hospital Compare Ratings and Penalties, and How Much Do They Matter?

BACKGROUND:Voluntary Leapfrog Safe Practices Score (SPS) measures were among the first public reports of hospital performance. Recently, Medicare’s Hospital Compare website has reported compulsory measures. Leapfrog’s Hospital Safety Score (HSS) grades incorporate SPS and Medicare measures. We evalu...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Medical care 2017-06, Vol.55 (6), p.606-614
Hauptverfasser: Smith, Shawna N., Reichert, Heidi A., Ameling, Jessica M., Meddings, Jennifer
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 614
container_issue 6
container_start_page 606
container_title Medical care
container_volume 55
creator Smith, Shawna N.
Reichert, Heidi A.
Ameling, Jessica M.
Meddings, Jennifer
description BACKGROUND:Voluntary Leapfrog Safe Practices Score (SPS) measures were among the first public reports of hospital performance. Recently, Medicare’s Hospital Compare website has reported compulsory measures. Leapfrog’s Hospital Safety Score (HSS) grades incorporate SPS and Medicare measures. We evaluate associations between Leapfrog SPS and Medicare measures, and the impact of SPS on HSS grades. METHODS:Using 2013 hospital data, we linked Leapfrog HSS data with central line–associated bloodstream infection (CLABSI) and catheter-associated urinary tract infection (CAUTI) standardized infection ratios (SIRs), and Hospital Readmission and Hospital-Acquired Condition (HAC) Reduction Program penalties incorporating 2013 performance. For SPS-providing hospitals, we used linear and logistic regression models to predict CLABSI/CAUTI SIRs and penalties as a function of SPS. For hospitals not reporting SPS, we simulated change in HSS grades after imputing a range of SPS. RESULTS:In total, 1089 hospitals reported SPS; >50% self-reported perfect scores for all but 1 measure. No SPS measures were associated with SIRs. One SPS (feedback) was associated with lower odds of HAC penalization (odds ratio, 0.86; 95% confidence interval, 0.76–0.97). Among hospitals not reporting SPS (N=1080), 98% and 54% saw grades decline by 1+ letters with first and 10th percentile SPS imputed, respectively; 49% and 54% saw grades improve by 1+ letter with median and highest SPS imputed. CONCLUSIONS:Voluntary Leapfrog SPS measures skew toward positive self-report and bear little association with compulsory Medicare outcomes and penalties. SPS significantly impacts HSS grades, particularly when lower SPS is reported. With increasing compulsory reporting, Leapfrog SPS seems limited for comparing hospital performance.
doi_str_mv 10.1097/MLR.0000000000000716
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>jstor_pubme</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_5517312</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><jstor_id>26418381</jstor_id><sourcerecordid>26418381</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4106-5bb0a0d16cff397647293411207607901bc527c2d25111523258afc1ec8c73ac3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqFkM1PGzEQxS1EBSHlxLWgSly4LJ3x916QqvDRSqkqIThbjuNNNmzWwd4l6n9fV4E05VJf5uDfezPvEfIJ4RKhVF9-jO8vYfcplHtkgIKpAkuu98kAgIpCgSoPyVFKCwBUTNADckg11RoUHZCT6zol77q6nX0ee7uqYph9JB8q2yR__DqH5PH25mH0rRj_vPs--jouHEeQhZhMwMIUpasqVirJFS0ZR6SgZN4JOHGCKkenVCCioIwKbSuH3mmnmHVsSK42vqt-svRT59su2sasYr208ZcJtjb__rT13MzCixEiB0GaDS5eDWJ47n3qzLJOzjeNbX3ok0GtlKCSc8jo-Tt0EfrY5ngGS2ClkFzITPEN5WJIKfpqewyC-dO6ya2b961n2dlukK3oreYM6A2wDk3nY3pq-rWPZu5t083_5326kS5SF-Jfa8lRM43sN3celKA</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1903956456</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Dissecting Leapfrog: How Well Do Leapfrog Safe Practices Scores Correlate With Hospital Compare Ratings and Penalties, and How Much Do They Matter?</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Journals@Ovid Complete</source><source>JSTOR Archive Collection A-Z Listing</source><creator>Smith, Shawna N. ; Reichert, Heidi A. ; Ameling, Jessica M. ; Meddings, Jennifer</creator><creatorcontrib>Smith, Shawna N. ; Reichert, Heidi A. ; Ameling, Jessica M. ; Meddings, Jennifer</creatorcontrib><description>BACKGROUND:Voluntary Leapfrog Safe Practices Score (SPS) measures were among the first public reports of hospital performance. Recently, Medicare’s Hospital Compare website has reported compulsory measures. Leapfrog’s Hospital Safety Score (HSS) grades incorporate SPS and Medicare measures. We evaluate associations between Leapfrog SPS and Medicare measures, and the impact of SPS on HSS grades. METHODS:Using 2013 hospital data, we linked Leapfrog HSS data with central line–associated bloodstream infection (CLABSI) and catheter-associated urinary tract infection (CAUTI) standardized infection ratios (SIRs), and Hospital Readmission and Hospital-Acquired Condition (HAC) Reduction Program penalties incorporating 2013 performance. For SPS-providing hospitals, we used linear and logistic regression models to predict CLABSI/CAUTI SIRs and penalties as a function of SPS. For hospitals not reporting SPS, we simulated change in HSS grades after imputing a range of SPS. RESULTS:In total, 1089 hospitals reported SPS; &gt;50% self-reported perfect scores for all but 1 measure. No SPS measures were associated with SIRs. One SPS (feedback) was associated with lower odds of HAC penalization (odds ratio, 0.86; 95% confidence interval, 0.76–0.97). Among hospitals not reporting SPS (N=1080), 98% and 54% saw grades decline by 1+ letters with first and 10th percentile SPS imputed, respectively; 49% and 54% saw grades improve by 1+ letter with median and highest SPS imputed. CONCLUSIONS:Voluntary Leapfrog SPS measures skew toward positive self-report and bear little association with compulsory Medicare outcomes and penalties. SPS significantly impacts HSS grades, particularly when lower SPS is reported. With increasing compulsory reporting, Leapfrog SPS seems limited for comparing hospital performance.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0025-7079</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1537-1948</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1097/MLR.0000000000000716</identifier><identifier>PMID: 28288072</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc</publisher><subject>Comparative analysis ; Computer simulation ; Confidence intervals ; Correlation analysis ; Datasets as Topic ; Health Policy ; Hospitals ; Hospitals - standards ; Medicare ; Original Article ; Patient Readmission ; Patient safety ; Patient Safety - standards ; Regression models ; Safety Management - organization &amp; administration ; Self Report ; Statistical analysis ; Urinary tract ; Websites</subject><ispartof>Medical care, 2017-06, Vol.55 (6), p.606-614</ispartof><rights>Copyright © 2017 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc.</rights><rights>Copyright © 2017 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.</rights><rights>Copyright Lippincott Williams &amp; Wilkins Jun 2017</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4106-5bb0a0d16cff397647293411207607901bc527c2d25111523258afc1ec8c73ac3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/26418381$$EPDF$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/26418381$$EHTML$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,315,781,785,804,886,27929,27930,58022,58255</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28288072$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Smith, Shawna N.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Reichert, Heidi A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ameling, Jessica M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Meddings, Jennifer</creatorcontrib><title>Dissecting Leapfrog: How Well Do Leapfrog Safe Practices Scores Correlate With Hospital Compare Ratings and Penalties, and How Much Do They Matter?</title><title>Medical care</title><addtitle>Med Care</addtitle><description>BACKGROUND:Voluntary Leapfrog Safe Practices Score (SPS) measures were among the first public reports of hospital performance. Recently, Medicare’s Hospital Compare website has reported compulsory measures. Leapfrog’s Hospital Safety Score (HSS) grades incorporate SPS and Medicare measures. We evaluate associations between Leapfrog SPS and Medicare measures, and the impact of SPS on HSS grades. METHODS:Using 2013 hospital data, we linked Leapfrog HSS data with central line–associated bloodstream infection (CLABSI) and catheter-associated urinary tract infection (CAUTI) standardized infection ratios (SIRs), and Hospital Readmission and Hospital-Acquired Condition (HAC) Reduction Program penalties incorporating 2013 performance. For SPS-providing hospitals, we used linear and logistic regression models to predict CLABSI/CAUTI SIRs and penalties as a function of SPS. For hospitals not reporting SPS, we simulated change in HSS grades after imputing a range of SPS. RESULTS:In total, 1089 hospitals reported SPS; &gt;50% self-reported perfect scores for all but 1 measure. No SPS measures were associated with SIRs. One SPS (feedback) was associated with lower odds of HAC penalization (odds ratio, 0.86; 95% confidence interval, 0.76–0.97). Among hospitals not reporting SPS (N=1080), 98% and 54% saw grades decline by 1+ letters with first and 10th percentile SPS imputed, respectively; 49% and 54% saw grades improve by 1+ letter with median and highest SPS imputed. CONCLUSIONS:Voluntary Leapfrog SPS measures skew toward positive self-report and bear little association with compulsory Medicare outcomes and penalties. SPS significantly impacts HSS grades, particularly when lower SPS is reported. With increasing compulsory reporting, Leapfrog SPS seems limited for comparing hospital performance.</description><subject>Comparative analysis</subject><subject>Computer simulation</subject><subject>Confidence intervals</subject><subject>Correlation analysis</subject><subject>Datasets as Topic</subject><subject>Health Policy</subject><subject>Hospitals</subject><subject>Hospitals - standards</subject><subject>Medicare</subject><subject>Original Article</subject><subject>Patient Readmission</subject><subject>Patient safety</subject><subject>Patient Safety - standards</subject><subject>Regression models</subject><subject>Safety Management - organization &amp; administration</subject><subject>Self Report</subject><subject>Statistical analysis</subject><subject>Urinary tract</subject><subject>Websites</subject><issn>0025-7079</issn><issn>1537-1948</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2017</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNqFkM1PGzEQxS1EBSHlxLWgSly4LJ3x916QqvDRSqkqIThbjuNNNmzWwd4l6n9fV4E05VJf5uDfezPvEfIJ4RKhVF9-jO8vYfcplHtkgIKpAkuu98kAgIpCgSoPyVFKCwBUTNADckg11RoUHZCT6zol77q6nX0ee7uqYph9JB8q2yR__DqH5PH25mH0rRj_vPs--jouHEeQhZhMwMIUpasqVirJFS0ZR6SgZN4JOHGCKkenVCCioIwKbSuH3mmnmHVsSK42vqt-svRT59su2sasYr208ZcJtjb__rT13MzCixEiB0GaDS5eDWJ47n3qzLJOzjeNbX3ok0GtlKCSc8jo-Tt0EfrY5ngGS2ClkFzITPEN5WJIKfpqewyC-dO6ya2b961n2dlukK3oreYM6A2wDk3nY3pq-rWPZu5t083_5326kS5SF-Jfa8lRM43sN3celKA</recordid><startdate>201706</startdate><enddate>201706</enddate><creator>Smith, Shawna N.</creator><creator>Reichert, Heidi A.</creator><creator>Ameling, Jessica M.</creator><creator>Meddings, Jennifer</creator><general>Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc</general><general>Copyright Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved</general><general>Lippincott Williams &amp; Wilkins Ovid Technologies</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>5PM</scope></search><sort><creationdate>201706</creationdate><title>Dissecting Leapfrog</title><author>Smith, Shawna N. ; Reichert, Heidi A. ; Ameling, Jessica M. ; Meddings, Jennifer</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c4106-5bb0a0d16cff397647293411207607901bc527c2d25111523258afc1ec8c73ac3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2017</creationdate><topic>Comparative analysis</topic><topic>Computer simulation</topic><topic>Confidence intervals</topic><topic>Correlation analysis</topic><topic>Datasets as Topic</topic><topic>Health Policy</topic><topic>Hospitals</topic><topic>Hospitals - standards</topic><topic>Medicare</topic><topic>Original Article</topic><topic>Patient Readmission</topic><topic>Patient safety</topic><topic>Patient Safety - standards</topic><topic>Regression models</topic><topic>Safety Management - organization &amp; administration</topic><topic>Self Report</topic><topic>Statistical analysis</topic><topic>Urinary tract</topic><topic>Websites</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Smith, Shawna N.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Reichert, Heidi A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ameling, Jessica M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Meddings, Jennifer</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Health &amp; Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><jtitle>Medical care</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Smith, Shawna N.</au><au>Reichert, Heidi A.</au><au>Ameling, Jessica M.</au><au>Meddings, Jennifer</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Dissecting Leapfrog: How Well Do Leapfrog Safe Practices Scores Correlate With Hospital Compare Ratings and Penalties, and How Much Do They Matter?</atitle><jtitle>Medical care</jtitle><addtitle>Med Care</addtitle><date>2017-06</date><risdate>2017</risdate><volume>55</volume><issue>6</issue><spage>606</spage><epage>614</epage><pages>606-614</pages><issn>0025-7079</issn><eissn>1537-1948</eissn><abstract>BACKGROUND:Voluntary Leapfrog Safe Practices Score (SPS) measures were among the first public reports of hospital performance. Recently, Medicare’s Hospital Compare website has reported compulsory measures. Leapfrog’s Hospital Safety Score (HSS) grades incorporate SPS and Medicare measures. We evaluate associations between Leapfrog SPS and Medicare measures, and the impact of SPS on HSS grades. METHODS:Using 2013 hospital data, we linked Leapfrog HSS data with central line–associated bloodstream infection (CLABSI) and catheter-associated urinary tract infection (CAUTI) standardized infection ratios (SIRs), and Hospital Readmission and Hospital-Acquired Condition (HAC) Reduction Program penalties incorporating 2013 performance. For SPS-providing hospitals, we used linear and logistic regression models to predict CLABSI/CAUTI SIRs and penalties as a function of SPS. For hospitals not reporting SPS, we simulated change in HSS grades after imputing a range of SPS. RESULTS:In total, 1089 hospitals reported SPS; &gt;50% self-reported perfect scores for all but 1 measure. No SPS measures were associated with SIRs. One SPS (feedback) was associated with lower odds of HAC penalization (odds ratio, 0.86; 95% confidence interval, 0.76–0.97). Among hospitals not reporting SPS (N=1080), 98% and 54% saw grades decline by 1+ letters with first and 10th percentile SPS imputed, respectively; 49% and 54% saw grades improve by 1+ letter with median and highest SPS imputed. CONCLUSIONS:Voluntary Leapfrog SPS measures skew toward positive self-report and bear little association with compulsory Medicare outcomes and penalties. SPS significantly impacts HSS grades, particularly when lower SPS is reported. With increasing compulsory reporting, Leapfrog SPS seems limited for comparing hospital performance.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc</pub><pmid>28288072</pmid><doi>10.1097/MLR.0000000000000716</doi><tpages>9</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0025-7079
ispartof Medical care, 2017-06, Vol.55 (6), p.606-614
issn 0025-7079
1537-1948
language eng
recordid cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_5517312
source MEDLINE; Journals@Ovid Complete; JSTOR Archive Collection A-Z Listing
subjects Comparative analysis
Computer simulation
Confidence intervals
Correlation analysis
Datasets as Topic
Health Policy
Hospitals
Hospitals - standards
Medicare
Original Article
Patient Readmission
Patient safety
Patient Safety - standards
Regression models
Safety Management - organization & administration
Self Report
Statistical analysis
Urinary tract
Websites
title Dissecting Leapfrog: How Well Do Leapfrog Safe Practices Scores Correlate With Hospital Compare Ratings and Penalties, and How Much Do They Matter?
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-16T01%3A58%3A09IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-jstor_pubme&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Dissecting%20Leapfrog:%20How%20Well%20Do%20Leapfrog%20Safe%20Practices%20Scores%20Correlate%20With%20Hospital%20Compare%20Ratings%20and%20Penalties,%20and%20How%20Much%20Do%20They%20Matter?&rft.jtitle=Medical%20care&rft.au=Smith,%20Shawna%20N.&rft.date=2017-06&rft.volume=55&rft.issue=6&rft.spage=606&rft.epage=614&rft.pages=606-614&rft.issn=0025-7079&rft.eissn=1537-1948&rft_id=info:doi/10.1097/MLR.0000000000000716&rft_dat=%3Cjstor_pubme%3E26418381%3C/jstor_pubme%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1903956456&rft_id=info:pmid/28288072&rft_jstor_id=26418381&rfr_iscdi=true