Comparative Analysis Raw Score

Hospital Comparison

Tool: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Hospital Quality Overview

Website: http://hospitalcompare.hhs.gov/

Area: 3 major hospitals for zip 98101, Seattle, WA: Virginia Mason, Swedish, and Harborview

Ease of Use: Easy, some confusion in needing to click "For consumers," Or "For professionals" in order to gain detailed definitions and explanations of terms.

Relevant Information: General information, medical or surgical condition available.

Features: Good explanation of process of care, outcome of care measures, and policies; also resource locators, help and support, and ways for individuals to manage their health.

How Should Database be Used? Primarily for informational purposes and as a basic guide. Could perhaps be used to define and hone in on particular expertise for surgery or specialty. In major urban areas in which there are several hospitals from which to choose, the tool might be advantageous as a way to make better healthcare choices.

Evaluation based on text:

Criteria

Measurement

Comments

Number of Measures

Important to validate tool so that more than a single measure per category brings a broader picture.

Robust, 8-10 per issue (e.g. nursing, etc.).

Display of Results

Presentation must be meaningful, clear, and data presented in a way that focuses on the question.

Available as graphics, tables, and answers to question; information is clearly presented.

Credibility of Data Source

Number of participants, quality of research.'

Clearly stated, and at least 30% surveys completed for use in study.

Risk Adjustment

How was data weighted due to regional conditions?

More than one data set used for comparison, from 2003-2010.

Missing Data

Does excluded data significantly impact study results.

Insisted on very basic standard measures (National basis), other data included but basics always there. Some data not included (insurance or malpractice issues).

Aggregation Issues

Organization.

Empirically driven, bottom up data sets and presentation.

Statistical Evaluations

Robust, standard, peer reviewed.

Yes; explained in all sections and examples given. Sample sizes vs. observed rates given.

Summation

Effectiveness

Very effective, unbiased information source. Not controversial, there is missing information on malpractice, error deaths, etc. that might be important in an overall evaluation; this data is primarily based on patient surveys.

Examples:

How often did nurses communicate well with patients?

Patients reported how often their nurses communicated well with them during their hospital stay. "Communicated well" means nurses explained things clearly, listened carefully to the patient, and treated the patient with courtesy and respect.

Nurses "always" communicated well

Nurses "usually" communicated well

Nurses "sometimes" or "never" communicated well

Data Collected

Average For All Reporting Hospitals In The United States

76%

19%

5%

10/1/2009

9/30/2010

Average For All Reporting Hospitals In Washington