Solutions for improved hospital-wide patient flows - a qualitative interview study of leading healthcare providers.

BACKGROUND: Hospital productivity is of great importance for patients and public health to achieve better availability and health outcomes. Previous research demonstrates that improvements can be reached by directing more attention to the flow of patients. There is a significant body of literature on how to improve patient flows, but these research projects rarely encompass complete hospitals. Therefore, through interviews with senior managers at the world's leading hospitals, this study aims to identify effective solutions to enable swift patient flows across hospitals and develop a framework to guide improvements in hospital-wide patient flows. METHODS: This study drew on qualitative data from interviews with 33 senior managers at 18 of the world's 25 leading hospitals, spread across nine countries. The interviews were conducted between June 2021 and November 2021 and transcribed verbatim. A thematic analysis followed, based on inductive reasoning to identify meaningful subjects and themes. RESULTS: We have identified 50 solutions to efficient hospital-wide patient flows. They describe the importance for hospitals to align the organization; build a coordination and transfer structure; ensure physical capacity capabilities; develop standards, checklists, and routines; invest in digital and analytical tools; improve the management of operations; optimize capacity utilization and occupancy rates; and seek external solutions and policy changes. This study also presents a patient flow improvement framework to be used by healthcare managers, commissioners, and decision-makers when designing strategies to improve the delivery of healthcare services to meet the needs of patients. CONCLUSIONS: Hospitals must invest in new capabilities and technologies, implement new working methods, and build a patient flow-focused culture. It is also important to strategically look at the patient's whole trajectory of care as one unified flow that must be aligned and integrated between and across all actors, internally and externally. Hospitals need to both proactively and reactively optimize their capacity use around the patient flow to provide care for as many patients as possible and to spread the burden evenly across the organization.

"The reputation premium": does hospital ranking improvement lead to a higher healthcare spending?

Global health systems have often disclosed hospital quality and performance information via hospital ranking or rating programs over the last 20 years. This study aims to examine the relationship between hospital ranking and healthcare spending. Using the Basic Medical Insurance claims data from a big city in central China and the hospital ranking data from the Fudan Chinese Hospital League Table from 2016 to 2018, this study exploits the variation of hospital reputable ranking across hospitals and periods to employ the difference-in-differences (DiD) design. To alleviate the self-selection bias emerging from inpatients' selection of hospitals and the extrapolation bias emerging from the potential mis-specification of our linear model, we combine the DiD design with the 3-to-1 optimal Mahalanobis metric matching method. This study finds that ceteris paribus one hospital ascending from the Regional Famous Hospital Group to the National Famous Hospital Group significantly increases inpatients' total healthcare costs, reimbursement costs, and out-of-pocket costs by 5.9%, 6.2%, and 4.0%, respectively. Mechanism analysis reveals that it should be attributed more to physician moral hazard than patient willingness-to-pay. Leads and lags (event study) analysis validates our DiD identification framework and shows that the impact materializes slowly but significantly. In the robustness check, we transfer the outcome variables from the log value to the level value and control five digits of ICD-10 for the disease fixed-effects. The results are highly robust.

A comparison of Knowledge, attitude and practice (KAP) of nurses on nursing Post-stroke dysphagia patients between iii-A and ii-A hospitals in China: a propensity score-matched analysis.

BACKGROUND: Whether knowledge, attitude and practice of nurses on nursing post-stroke dysphagia patients varies between different ranking hospitals is still unknown. This study aimed to compare the knowledge, attitude and practice level of nurses on nursing post-stroke dysphagia patients between iii-A and ii-A hospitals in China. DESIGN: A cross-sectional study design was used. METHODS: Data were collected from eighteen hospitals in Wuhan, Hubei in May-July 2020, and a total of 824 nurses were recruited by convenient sampling. After propensity score matching, 205 participants in iii-A hospitals were matched with 205 participants in ii-A hospitals. RESULTS: There were no statistically differences in the socio-demographic characteristics between two groups after propensity score matching. Before matching, the regression coefficients between hospital ranking and knowledge, attitude, practice were -0.415, -0.718 and -1.855, respectively. After matching, the coefficients changed to -0.394, -0.824 and -1.278. Nurses from iii-A hospitals had higher knowledge and attitude scores than nurses from ii-A hospitals, but no significant practice scores difference was observed between various rankings of hospitals. CONCLUSIONS: The KAP of nurses on nursing post-stroke dysphagia patients were different in iii-A and ii-A hospitals. Administrators should strengthen management, provide more learning resources and trainings to meet nurses' needs about methods to deal with and recognize dysphagia, so as to further improve the quality of post-stroke dysphagia management.

The Provision of Complementary, Alternative, and Integrative Medicine Information and Services: a Review of World Leading Oncology Hospital Websites.

BACKGROUND: Many cancer patients use complementary, alternative, and integrative medicine (CAIM) to improve their psychological and functional health. However, there is little known about the extent of CAIM information and services provided on oncology hospital websites. METHODS: This study reviewed public-facing websites to determine the degree of CAIM information provided and services offered by the world's leading cancer hospitals in 2021; this ranking was informed by a large survey of medical professionals led by Newsweek and Statista. Nine authors extracted data from hospital websites individually and in triplicate, prior to meeting to revise data extractions. Data analysis was then performed by two authors to determine how many hospitals provided CAIM descriptions and offered CAIM services, and the extent of CAIM information provided. RESULTS: A total of 131 hospitals were included in this study. Of the eligible hospitals, 50.38% (n = 66) provided a theoretical description of CAIM; 48.09% (n = 63) provided a description of one or more CAIM therapies; 63.36% (n = 83) offered one or more CAIM therapies to cancer patients. The most common therapies described were the same as the most common therapies offered. These therapies are massage, special foods and diets, acupuncture, meditation, yoga, and creative outlets. While CAIM therapies were commonly offered, information surrounding the benefits and side effects associated with these therapies varied. CONCLUSIONS: Due to the lack of CAIM standardization worldwide, there is a need for increased CAIM information provision on hospital websites to better inform and empower patients to make well-informed decisions about their health.

Scientific research competitiveness in hospitals: A narrative review of major hospital ranking systems in China.

Background and Aims: Several hospital ranking systems have been created in China recently, but there is still a lack of comprehensive analysis of the weight and significance of scientific research in hospital ranking. The present study aimed to identify and analyze the role of scientific research competitiveness in various hospital ranking systems in China. Methods: Over 200 materials published between 2010 and 2020 and related to three mainstream hospital ranking systems in China were reviewed. The methodologies applied in the three ranking systems were analyzed and compared. In addition, the comparative learning and analysis of Top 10 and Top 46-55 hospitals according to the ranking system of China's Best Hospital Rankings was performed for a longitudinal study. Results: The three major hospital rankings had different scientific research capability ranking methodologies and emphases of scientific research evaluation systems. The most commonly used indicators were science citation index (SCI) publications, National Scientific Foundation of China funding, a number of national key laboratories, and a number of academicians. The relative standing of several top hospitals showed slightly different in the three major Chinese hospital ranking systems. For the longitudinal study, we found that the fluctuation of the ranking of the Top 46-55 hospitals was significantly higher than that of the Top 10 hospitals, in which scientific research played a vital role. Conclusion: The proportion of scientific research plays an important role in the hospital ranking systems. The quality and quantity of SCI publications, the key indicators of national projects, and top academic talents are the most important factors used to evaluate the level of hospital scientific research, and thus affect the ranking of hospitals.

The glaring omission in hospital ranking and quality grading programs: emergency department boarding.

Hospitals in the United States are assessed and ranked by several agencies and services, including U.S. News & World Report. Frequently, though, the key hospital throughput metric of inpatient boarding time in the emergency department (ED) is not considered when ranking hospitals. As a result, there is a discordance in which highly ranking hospitals may be poor performers in boarding of patients, a practice with known adverse safety effects. This article outlines the rationale for considering ED boarding in hospital ranking and quality assessments.

Rating Hospital Performance in China: Review of Publicly Available Measures and Development of a Ranking System.

BACKGROUND: In China, significant emphasis and investment in health care reform since 2009 has brought with it increasing scrutiny of its public hospitals. Calls for greater accountability in the quality of hospital care have led to increasing attention toward performance measurement and the development of hospital ratings. Despite such interest, there has yet to be a comprehensive analysis of what performance information is publicly available to understand the performance of hospitals in China. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to review the publicly available performance information about hospitals in China to assess options for ranking hospital performance. METHODS: A review was undertaken to identify performance measures based on publicly available data. Following several rounds of expert consultation regarding the utility of these measures, we clustered the available options into three key areas: research and development, academic reputation, and quality and safety. Following the identification and clustering of the available performance measures, we set out to translate these into a practical performance ranking system to assess variation in hospital performance. RESULTS: A new hospital ranking system termed the China Hospital Development Index (CHDI) is thus presented. Furthermore, we used CHDI for ranking well-known tertiary hospitals in China. CONCLUSIONS: Despite notable limitations, our assessment of available measures and the development of a new ranking system break new ground in understanding hospital performance in China. In doing so, CHDI has the potential to contribute to wider discussions and debates about assessing hospital performance across global health care systems.

Otolaryngology Residency Program Rankings and Social Media Usage: A Longitudinal Analysis.

OBJECTIVE: Social media is a powerful networking tool among health care organizations. This study determines correlations between program reputation and social media activity and popularity, specifically among otolaryngology residency programs. METHODS: Accredited programs, excluding military and osteopathic, in the United States were included. Activity and popularity on Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram were assessed during the same 7-month period from 2016 to 2020. Doximity Residency reputation scores (dividing programs into quartiles) and US News & World Report (comparing programs affiliated with top hospitals versus those with unranked hospitals) were utilized to compare differences based on reputation. RESULTS: Of 104 programs, 91 (88%) had social media accounts. Instagram and Twitter were more commonly used than Facebook, with 78 (75%), 49 (47%), and 42 (40%) accounts, respectively. The cumulative use of all three platforms grew yearly, while Twitter (R2  = 0.9863) and Instagram (R2  = 0.9955) presence increased exponentially. Doximity's top quartile programs had more Facebook (P = .020), Twitter (P < .001), and Instagram (P = .102) accounts. First-quartile programs also adopted each platform months before fourth-quartile programs. Stratified by US News & World Report, ranked programs had more social media accounts, with 24 (53%) on Facebook (P = .028), 32 (71%) on Twitter (P < .001), and 37 (82%) on Instagram (P = .155). Programs with higher reputations were more active and exhibited increased likes and followers over time. CONCLUSION: Social media use among otolaryngology programs has grown exponentially, with Instagram and Twitter becoming the dominant platforms. Higher ranked programs are more active on social media, have more followers, and adopt social media earlier. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 4 Laryngoscope, 131:2455-2460, 2021.

Effect of Case-Mix and Random Variation on Breast Cancer Care Quality Indicators and Their Rankability.

OBJECTIVES: Hospital comparisons to improve quality of care require valid and reliable quality indicators. We aimed to test the validity and reliability of 6 breast cancer indicators by quantifying the influence of case-mix and random variation. METHODS: The nationwide population-based database included 79 690 patients with breast cancer from 91 Dutch hospitals between 2011 and 2016. The indicator-scores calculated were: (1) irradical breast-conserving surgery (BCS) for invasive disease, (2) irradical BCS for ductal carcinoma-in-situ, (3) breast contour-preserving treatment, (4) magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) before neo-adjuvant chemotherapy, (5) radiotherapy for locally advanced disease, and (6) surgery within 5 weeks from diagnosis. Case-mix and random variation adjustments were performed by multivariable fixed and random effect logistic regression models. Rankability quantified the between-hospital variation, representing unexplained differences that might be the result of the level of quality of care, as low (<50%), moderate (50%-75%), or high (>75%). RESULTS: All of the indicators showed between-hospital variation with wide (interquartile) ranges. Case-mix adjustment reduced variation in indicators 1 and 3 to 5. Random variation adjustment (further) reduced the variation for all indicators. Case-mix and random variation adjustments influenced the indicator-scores of individual hospitals and their ranking. Rankability was poor for indicator 1, 2, and 5, and moderate for 3, 4, and 6. CONCLUSIONS: The 6 indicators lacked validity and/or reliability to a certain extent. Although measuring quality indicators may stimulate quality improvement in general, comparisons and judgments of individual hospital performance should be made with caution if based on indicators that have not been tested or adjusted for validity and reliability, especially in benchmarking.

U.S. News and World Report hospital ranking and surgical outcomes among patients undergoing surgery for cancer.

BACKGROUND: Despite the popularity of the U.S. News and World Report (USNWR) hospital rankings among the general public, the relationship between hospital rankings and actual patient outcomes for major cancers remains poorly investigated. METHODS: Medicare Inpatient Standard Analytic Files were queried from 2013-2015 to assess the relationship of postoperative outcomes and Medicare expenditures among patients undergoing surgery for colorectal, lung, esophageal, pancreatic, and liver cancer at hospitals ranked in the top-50 USNWR vs hospitals ranked below 50. RESULTS: Among 94 599 patients, 13 217 vs 81 382 patients underwent surgery at a top-50 hospital versus a non-top 50 ranked hospital. Other than among patients who underwent colorectal surgery, the odds of postoperative complications were lower at top ranked vs non-top ranked hospitals (colorectal: OR, 1.46, 95% CI, 1.28-1.65; lung: OR, 0.73, 95% CI, 0.61-0.87; esophagus: OR, 0.70, 95% CI, 0.52-0.94; pancreas: OR, 0.81, 95% CI, 0.70-0.94; liver: OR, 0.85, 95% CI, 0.69-1.04). Moreover, the odds of 90-day mortality were lower at top ranked hospitals vs non-top ranked hospitals (colorectal: OR, 0.59, 95% CI, 0.48-74; lung: OR, 0.66, 95% CI, 0.53-0.82; esophagus: OR, 0.56, 95% CI, 0.40-0.80; pancreas: OR, 0.51, 95% CI, 0.40-0.65; liver: OR, 0.61, 95% CI, 0.44-0.84). Outcomes were comparable among hospitals within the top-50 rank. CONCLUSION: Mortality rates were lower at hospitals in the top-50 USNWR versus non-top ranked, yet hospitals within the top-50 USNWR rankings had comparable outcomes.

Association Between Institutional Social Media Involvement and Gastroenterology Divisional Rankings: Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: Patients often look to social media as an important tool to gather information about institutions and professionals. Since 1990, United States News and World Report (USNWR) has published annual rankings of hospitals and subspecialty divisions. It remains unknown if social media presence is associated with the USNWR gastroenterology and gastrointestinal (GI) surgery divisional rankings, or how changes in online presence over time affects division ranking. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to determine if social media presence is associated with USNWR gastroenterology and GI surgery divisional rankings and to ascertain how changes in online presence over time affect division rankings. METHODS: Social media presence among the top 30 institutions listed in the 2014 USNWR gastroenterology and GI surgery divisional rankings were assessed using Pearson's correlation coefficients and multivariate analysis, controlling for covariates. Linear and logistic regression using data from 2014 and 2016 USNWR rankings were then used to assess the association between institutional ranking or reputation score with any potential changes in numbers of followers over time. Sensitivity analysis was performed by assessing the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve to determine the follower threshold associated with improved or maintained ranking, which was done by dichotomizing changes in followers at values between the 7000 and 12,000 follower mark. RESULTS: Twitter follower count was an independent predictor of divisional ranking (ß=.00004; P<.001) and reputation score (ß=-.00002; P=.03) in 2014. Academic affiliation also independently predicted USNWR division ranking (ß=5.3; P=.04) and reputation score (ß=-7.3; P=.03). Between 2014 and 2016, Twitter followers remained significantly associated with improved or maintained rankings (OR 14.63; 95% CI 1.08-197.81; P=.04). On sensitivity analysis, an 8000 person increase in Twitter followers significantly predicted improved or maintained rankings compared to other cutoffs. CONCLUSIONS: Institutional social media presence is independently associated with USNWR divisional ranking and reputation score. Improvement in social media following was also independently associated with improved or maintained divisional ranking and reputation score, with a threshold of 8000 additional followers as the best predictor of improved or stable ranking.

Challenging 30-day mortality as a site-specific quality metric in non-small cell lung cancer.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this project was to assess the best measure for postoperative outcomes by comparing 30-day and 90-day mortality rates after surgery for non-small cell lung cancer using the National Cancer Database. Secondarily, hospital performance was examined at multiple postoperative intervals to assess changes in ranking based on mortality up to 1 year after surgery. METHODS: Patients who had undergone surgery for non-small cell lung cancer between 2004 and 2013 were identified in the National Cancer Database. Mortality rates at 30 days and 90 days were compared after adjusting for several patient characteristics, tumor variables, and hospital procedural volume using generalized logistic mixed models. Subsequently, mixed model logistic regression models were employed to evaluate hospital performance based on calculated mortality at prespecified time points. RESULTS: A total of 303,579 patients with non-small cell lung cancer were included for analysis. The 90-day mortality was almost double the 30-day mortality (3.0% vs 5.7%). Several patient characteristics, tumor features, and hospital volume were significantly associated with mortality at both 30 days and 90 days. Hospital rankings fluctuate appreciably between early mortality time points, which is additional evidence that quality metrics need to be based on later mortality time points. CONCLUSIONS: Thirty-day mortality is the commonly accepted quality measure for thoracic surgeons; however, hospital rankings may be inaccurate if based on this variable alone. Mortality after 90 days appears to be a threshold after which there is less variability in hospital ranking and should be considered as an alternative quality metric in lung cancer surgery.

Status of China's hospital rankings and its impact on hospital discipline construction / 中华医学科研管理杂志

Objective Through combing and analyzing the existing hospital rankings in China,comparing the similarities,differences and problems of existing rankings,to improve the hospital's understanding of the ranking work,and provide reference for hospital discipline construction and development.Methods To comprehensively review and compare the major ranking of hospitals in China,such as "China's Hospital Rankings","China's Hospitals · Competitiveness Rankings","Ranking of the Best Clinical Subjects in China","China Hospitals' Science and Technology Evaluation Metrics" and "Beijing Medical Service and Key Specialist Evaluation",and to analyze from the angle of the background,characteristics,evaluation methods,evaluation dimension and so on.Results At present,the hospital rankings have their own characteristics,each with its own focus,but there is still poor accessibility of clinical data,and the evaluation index of patients' medical experience and educational work are not perfect.Conclusions The hospital ranking list is a third-party evaluation tool to promote the construction of hospital disciplines effectively.It is recommended that all relevant organizations or departments further improve the construction of the ranking system,build big data platforms for hospital evaluation,improve the data accessibility of clinical medical quality and safety indicators,build scientific and objective dynamic evaluation systems,and carry out multi-level,multi-dimensional and continuous hospital ranking work.

Correlations Between Hospitals' Social Media Presence and Reputation Score and Ranking: Cross-Sectional Analysis.

BACKGROUND: The US News and World Report reputation score correlates strongly with overall rank in adult and pediatric hospital rankings. Social media affects how information is disseminated to physicians and is used by hospitals as a marketing tool to recruit patients. It is unclear whether the reputation score for adult and children's hospitals relates to social media presence. OBJECTIVE: The objective of our study was to analyze the association between a hospital's social media metrics and the US News 2017-2018 Best Hospital Rankings for adult and children's hospitals. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional analysis of the reputation score, total score, and social media metrics (Twitter, Facebook, and Instagram) of hospitals who received at least one subspecialty ranking in the 2017-2018 US News publicly available annual rankings. Regression analysis was employed to analyze the partial correlation coefficients between social media metrics and a hospital's total points (ie, rank) and reputation score for both adult and children's hospitals while controlling for the bed size and time on Twitter. RESULTS: We observed significant correlations for children's hospitals' reputation score and total points with the number of Twitter followers (total points: r=.465, P<.001; reputation: r=.524, P<.001) and Facebook followers (total points: r=.392, P=.002; reputation: r=.518, P<.001). Significant correlations for the adult hospitals reputation score were found with the number of Twitter followers (r=.848, P<.001), number of tweets (r=.535, P<.001), Klout score (r=.242, P=.02), and Facebook followers (r=.743, P<.001). In addition, significant correlations for adult hospitals total points were found with Twitter followers (r=.548, P<.001), number of tweets (r=.358, P<.001), Klout score (r=.203, P=.05), Facebook followers (r=.500, P<.001), and Instagram followers (r=.692, P<.001). CONCLUSIONS: A statistically significant correlation exists between multiple social media metrics and both a hospital's reputation score and total points (ie, overall rank). This association may indicate that a hospital's reputation may be influenced by its social media presence or that the reputation or rank of a hospital drives social media followers.

Comparison and analysis of scientific competitive index in Chinese hospital ranking list / 中华医学科研管理杂志

Objective Purpose to evaluate hospital scientific competition by analyzing the evaluative index system of scientific competition in these hospital ranking lists.Methods This paper took four main scientific competitive rankings in China as examples,analyzed their data sources,evaluation methods,indicators of entry points and indicators focus.Meanwhile,we took four representative hospitals for instance to compare the differences between content and focus.Results According to comparison of data source,we found that datum from the scientific indicators of the four rankings were publicly available.Regarding to the evaluation methods,the ranking of Chinas best hospitals was a combination of both subjective and objective factors,while others are objectively evaluated.In terms of indicators of entry points and indicators focus,the ranking of China's best hospitals only included scientific research output (2 indexes),the competitiveness ranking of Chinese hospitals only examined academic influence (6 indexes),the ranking of China hospital's scientific and technological influence was more comprehensive,including research input,output and academic influence (17 indexes),and the China hospital index of natural indexes focused on research output indicators (2 indexes).Conclusions In order to enhance the development of hospital science and technology competitiveness,hospitals were suggested to strengthen the high-quality papers,national project declaration and high-end scarce talents.