Institute for Healthcare Delivery and Population Science, University of Massachusetts Medical School at Baystate Health, Springfield, MA, USA.
Department of Medicine, University of Massachusetts Medical School at Baystate Health, Springfield, MA, USA.
J Gen Intern Med. 2019 Nov;34(11):2542-2548. doi: 10.1007/s11606-019-05267-1. Epub 2019 Aug 28.
Physician attitudes about websites that publicly report health care quality and experience data have not been recently described.
To examine physician attitudes about the accuracy of websites that report information about quality of care and patient experience and to describe physician beliefs about the helpfulness of these data for patients choosing a physician.
DESIGN, PARTICIPANTS, AND MEASURES: The Rhode Island Department of Health (RIDOH) and a multi-stakeholder group developed and piloted two questions that were added to RIDOH's biennial physician survey of all 4197 practicing physicians in Rhode Island: (1) "How accurate of a picture do you feel that the following types of online resources give about the quality of care that physicians provide?" (with choices) and (2) "Which types of physician-specific information (i.e., not about the practice overall) would be helpful to include in online resources for patients to help them choose a new physician? (Select all that apply)." Responses were stratified by primary care vs. subspecialty clinicians. Summary statistics and chi-squared tests were used to analyze the results.
Among 1792 respondents (response rate 43%), 45% were unaware of RIDOH's site and 54% were unaware of the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS)' quality reporting sites. Only 2% felt that Medicare sites were "very accurate" in depicting physician quality. Most physicians supported public reporting of general information about physicians (e.g., board certification), but just over one-third of physicians felt that performance-based quality measures are "helpful" (and a similar percentage reported that patient reviews felt are "helpful") for patients choosing a physician.
Physician-respondents were either uninformed or skeptical about public reporting websites. In contrast to prior reports that a majority of patients value some forms of publicly reported data, most physicians do not consider quality metrics and patient-generated reviews helpful for patients who are choosing a physician.
最近没有描述医生对公开报告医疗保健质量和体验数据的网站的态度。
研究医生对报告有关护理质量和患者体验信息的网站的准确性的看法，并描述医生对这些数据对患者选择医生的帮助程度的看法。
设计、参与者和措施：罗德岛州卫生署（RIDOH）和一个多利益相关者小组制定并试行的两个问题被添加到 RIDOH 对罗德岛州所有 4197 名执业医生的两年一次的医生调查中：（1）“您认为以下类型的在线资源对医生提供的护理质量有多大的准确描述？”（有选择）和（2）“在线资源中应包括哪些类型的医师特定信息（即不是关于整个实践），以帮助患者选择新医生？（选择所有适用的）。”按初级保健医生与专科医生进行分层，使用汇总统计数据和卡方检验分析结果。
在 1792 名受访者中（应答率为 43%），45%的人不知道 RIDOH 的网站，54%的人不知道医疗保险和医疗补助服务中心（CMS）的质量报告网站。只有 2%的医生认为 Medicare 网站在描绘医生质量方面“非常准确”。大多数医生支持公开报告有关医生的一般信息（例如，董事会认证），但只有略多于三分之一的医生认为基于绩效的质量指标对患者选择医生“有帮助”（有类似比例的医生报告患者评价感到“有帮助”）。
医生应答者对公开报告网站要么不了解，要么持怀疑态度。与之前的报告相反，大多数患者重视某些形式的公开报告数据，大多数医生不认为质量指标和患者生成的评论对选择医生的患者有帮助。
