Hospital quality, cost data becoming more available online for
consumers, can be difficult to use
Oct 30, 2006--Information on the quality of care provided at
individual hospitals is now available online, but "many consumers
have a hard time making sense of the information," the
Miami Herald
reports.
According to the Herald, the "hope is that" improving health
care transparency by providing the information on Web sites "will
drive business to the providers that deliver the best care at the
lowest price, reducing costs and improving outcomes."
However, many observers say that what is now available on Web sites
such as
hospitalcompare.hhs.gov
and
floridacomparecare.gov
"is often confusing and perhaps useless," the Herald reports.
Brian Klepper, head of the
Center for Practical Health Reform,
said, "It's still a tower of Babel out there. We're getting data.
We're not getting information. Information is data made
understandable."
Former
CMS
Administrator Mark McClellan said that he and others want
information to be available that makes choosing a health care
provider as straightforward as buying a car. McClellan said, "We're
a long way from that, but we can't ever get the health system we
want unless we can measure it."
The Herald reports that some experts are "skeptical that
choosing a health care provider could -- or even should -- be like
buying a car." Gerard Anderson, a public health professor at
Johns Hopkins University,
said, "Each Ford is pretty much the same as another Ford," adding,
"In a hospital, each operation, each diagnosis -- it's not the
assembly line of care that allows for really good comparison
shopping." In addition, some hospital executives say the information
posted online can be misleading (Dorschner, Miami Herald,
10/29).
Information Validity Questioned
In related news, the
Herald
reports that most of the hospital quality-of-care information
available to consumers is based on claims forms submitted by
hospitals to insurance companies and Medicare.
The federally managed site Hospital Compare currently is the "only
major information source" of hospital quality data that is based on
clinical data, according to the Herald. The government pays
hospitals to collect the data.
Some experts "say it is impossible to do reliable risk adjustments
based on billing data," the Herald reports. Marc Volavka,
executive director of a Pennsylvania program that publishes clinical
data on hospitals, said, "I do not believe that billing data alone
is sufficient to do risk-adjusted outcomes to things like mortality
or complications."
However, McClellan said that studies have indicated that clinical
data and billing data often are similar. McClellan said a study
released earlier this year found that risk-adjusted claims data "are
good surrogates for estimates from a medical record model"
(Goldstein/Dorschner, Miami Herald, 10/29).