ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate participant characteristics and outcomes during the first 4 years of the Society of Thoracic Surgeons (STS) public reporting program. BACKGROUND: This is the first detailed analysis of a national, voluntary, cardiac surgery public reporting program using STS clinical registry data and National Quality Forum-endorsed performance measures. METHODS: The distributions of risk-adjusted mortality rates, multidimensional composite performance scores, star ratings, and volumes for public reporting versus nonreporting sites were studied during 9 consecutive semiannual reporting periods (2010-2014). RESULTS: Among 8929 unique observations (â¼1000 STS participant centers, 9 reporting periods), 916 sites (10.3%) were classified low performing, 6801 (76.2%) were average, and 1212 (13.6%) were high performing. STS public reporting participation varied from 22.2% to 46.3% over the 9 reporting periods. Risk-adjusted, patient-level mortality rates for isolated coronary artery bypass grafting were consistently lower in public reporting versus nonreporting sites (P value range: <0.001-0.0077). Reporting centers had higher composite performance scores and star ratings (23.2% high performing and 4.5% low performing vs 7.6% high performing and 13.8% low performing for nonreporting sites). STS public reporting sites had higher mean annualized coronary artery bypass grafting volumes than nonreporting sites (169 vs 145, P < 0.0001); high-performing programs had higher mean coronary artery bypass grafting volumes (n = 241) than average (n = 139) or low-performing (n = 153) sites. Risk factor prevalence (except reoperation) and expected mortality rates were generally stable during the study period. CONCLUSIONS: STS programs that voluntarily participate in public reporting have significantly higher volumes and performance. No evidence of risk aversion was found.
