Baier Rosa R, Wysocki Andrea, Gravenstein Stefan, Cooper Emily, Mor Vincent, Clark Melissa
Healthcentric Advisors, Providence, RI, 02908, USA,
J Gen Intern Med. 2015 May;30(5):634-40. doi: 10.1007/s11606-014-3164-7. Epub 2015 Jan 9.
Although hospitals are increasingly held accountable for patients' post-discharge outcomes, giving them incentive to help patients choose high-performing home health agencies, little is known about how quality reports inform decision making.
We aimed to learn how quality reports are used when choosing home care in one northeast state (Rhode Island) .
The study consisted of focus groups with home health consumers and structured interviews with hospital case managers.
Thirteen consumers and 28 case managers from five hospitals participated in the study.
We identified key themes and illustrative quotes by audiotaping each session, and then three independent reviewers conducted repeated examination and content analysis.
No participants were aware of existing state or Medicare home health agency public reports. Case managers provided agency lists to consumers, who routinely asked case managers to tell them which agencies to choose or which were best; but case managers felt unable to directly respond to consumers' requests for help in making the choice, because they did not have additional information to provide and because they feared violating federal laws requiring freedom of patient choice. Case managers also felt that there was little difference in agency quality, although they acknowledged they might not be aware of problems related to post-hospital care.
Home health consumers and hospital case managers were unaware of public reports about home health quality, which limited consumers' ability to make informed decisions and case managers' ability to assist them in that decision-making process. Case managers were otherwise prohibited from recommending specific providers to patients and viewed the 'patient choice' laws as restricting their ability to respond to patients' requests for help in choosing home health agencies. Public reports can be marketed as tools that case managers can use to help patients differentiate among providers, while supporting patient autonomy.
尽管医院越来越需要对患者出院后的结果负责,并有动力帮助患者选择表现出色的家庭健康机构,但对于质量报告如何影响决策却知之甚少。
我们旨在了解在东北部的一个州(罗德岛州)选择家庭护理时质量报告是如何被使用的。
该研究包括与家庭健康消费者进行焦点小组讨论以及对医院病例管理人员进行结构化访谈。
来自五家医院的13名消费者和28名病例管理人员参与了该研究。
我们通过录制每个环节来确定关键主题和说明性引语,然后由三名独立评审员进行反复检查和内容分析。
没有参与者知晓现有的州或医疗保险家庭健康机构公开报告。病例管理人员向消费者提供机构名单,消费者通常会要求病例管理人员告诉他们选择哪些机构或哪些是最好的机构;但病例管理人员觉得无法直接回应消费者在做出选择时寻求帮助的请求,因为他们没有更多信息可提供,并且因为他们担心违反要求患者有选择自由的联邦法律。病例管理人员还认为各机构的质量差异不大,尽管他们承认可能没有意识到与出院后护理相关的问题。
家庭健康消费者和医院病例管理人员并不知晓有关家庭健康质量的公开报告,这限制了消费者做出明智决策的能力以及病例管理人员在该决策过程中协助他们的能力。否则,病例管理人员被禁止向患者推荐特定的服务提供者,并认为“患者选择”法律限制了他们回应患者在选择家庭健康机构时寻求帮助的请求的能力。公开报告可以作为一种工具进行推广,病例管理人员可以利用它来帮助患者区分不同的服务提供者,同时支持患者的自主权。