Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2009 Apr;44(2 Pt 1):379-98.
doi: 10.1111/j.1475-6773.2008.00915.x. Epub 2008 Nov 4.

Impact of public reporting on unreported quality of care

Affiliations

Impact of public reporting on unreported quality of care

Rachel M Werner et al. Health Serv Res. 2009 Apr.

Abstract

Objective: The impact of quality improvement incentives on nontargeted care is unknown and some have expressed concern that such incentives may be harmful to nontargeted areas of care. Our objective is to examine the effect of publicly reporting quality information on unreported quality of care.

Data sources/study setting: The nursing home Minimum Data Set from 1999 to 2005 on all postacute care admissions.

Study design: We studied 13,683 skilled nursing facilities and examined how unreported aspects of clinical care changed in response to changes in reported care after public reporting was initiated by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services on their website, Nursing Home Compare, in 2002.

Principal findings: We find that overall both unreported and reported care improved following the launch of public reporting. Improvements in unreported care were particularly large among facilities with high scores or that significantly improved on reported measures, whereas low-scoring facilities experienced no change or worsening of their unreported quality of care.

Conclusions: Public reporting in the setting of postacute care had mixed effects on areas without public reporting, improving in high-ranking facilities, but worsening in low-ranking facilities. While the benefits of public reporting may extend beyond areas that are being directly measured, these initiatives may also widen the gap between high- and low-quality facilities.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Abt Associates Inc. Report to Congress: Appropriateness of Minimum Nurse Staffing Ratios in Nursing Homes Phase II Final Report. Baltimore: Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services; 2001.
    1. Asch SM, McGlynn EA, Hogan MM, Hayward RA, Shekelle P, Rubenstein L, Keesey J, Adams J, Kerr EA. Comparison of Quality of Care for Patients in the Veterans Health Administration and Patients in a National Sample. Annals of Internal Medicine. 2004;141:938–45. - PubMed
    1. Casalino LP. The Unintended Consequences of Measuring Quality on the Quality of Medical Care. New England Journal of Medicine. 1999;341:1147–50. - PubMed
    1. Centers for Medicare and Medicaid. Nursing Home Quality Initiatives Overview. 2002. [accessed on January 14, 2006]. Available at http://www.cms.hhs.gov/NursingHomeQualityInits/downloads/NHQIOverview.pdf.
    1. Gambassi G, Landi F, Peng L, Brostrup-Jensen C, Calore K, Hiris J, Lipsitz L, Mor V, Bernabei R. Validity of Diagnostic and Drug Data in Standardized Nursing Home Resident Assessments: Potential for Geriatric Pharmacoepidemiology. SAGE Study Group. Systematic Assessment of Geriatric Drug Use via Epidemiology. Medical Care. 1998;36:167–79. - PubMed

Publication types

MeSH terms