Incorporating Medicare Advantage Admissions Into the CMS Hospital-Wide Readmission Measure.

Importance: Medicare Advantage (MA) enrollment is rapidly expanding, yet Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) claims-based hospital outcome measures, including readmission rates, have historically included only fee-for-service (FFS) beneficiaries. Objective: To assess the outcomes of incorporating MA data into the CMS claims-based FFS Hospital-Wide All-Cause Unplanned Readmission (HWR) measure. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study assessed differences in 30-day unadjusted readmission rates and demographic and risk adjustment variables for MA vs FFS admissions. Inpatient FFS and MA administrative claims data were extracted from the Integrated Data Repository for all admissions for Medicare beneficiaries from July 1, 2018, to June 30, 2019. Measure reliability and risk-standardized readmission rates were calculated for the FFS and MA cohort vs the FFS-only cohort, overall and within specialty subgroups (cardiorespiratory, cardiovascular, medicine, surgery, neurology), then changes in hospital performance quintiles were assessed after adding MA admissions. Main Outcome and Measure: Risk-standardized readmission rates. Results: The cohort included 11 029 470 admissions (4 077 633 [37.0%] MA; 6 044 060 [54.8%] female; mean [SD] age, 77.7 [8.2] years). Unadjusted readmission rates were slightly higher for MA vs FFS admissions (15.7% vs 15.4%), yet comorbidities were generally lower among MA beneficiaries. Test-retest reliability for the FFS and MA cohort was higher than for the FFS-only cohort (0.78 vs 0.73) and signal-to-noise reliability increased in each specialty subgroup. Mean hospital risk-standardized readmission rates were similar for the FFS and MA cohort and FFS-only cohorts (15.5% vs 15.3%); this trend was consistent across the 5 specialty subgroups. After adding MA admissions to the FFS-only HWR measure, 1489 hospitals (33.1%) had their performance quintile ranking changed. As their proportion of MA admissions increased, more hospitals experienced a change in their performance quintile ranking (147 hospitals [16.3%] in the lowest quintile of percentage MA admissions; 408 [45.3%] in the highest). The combined cohort added 63 hospitals eligible for public reporting and more than 4 million admissions to the measure. Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study, adding MA admissions to the HWR measure was associated with improved measure reliability and precision and enabled the inclusion of more hospitals and beneficiaries. After MA admissions were included, 1 in 3 hospitals had their performance quintile changed, with the greatest shifts among hospitals with a high percentage of MA admissions.

Sex Disparities After Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting and Hospital Quality.

Importance: Concern has been raised about persistent sex disparities after coronary artery bypass grafting, with female patients having higher mortality. However, whether these disparities persist across hospitals of different qualities is unknown. Objective: To evaluate sex disparities in 30-day mortality after coronary artery bypass grafting across high- and low-quality hospitals. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional, retrospective cohort study evaluated Medicare beneficiaries undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting between October 1, 2015, and March 31, 2020. Data analysis was performed from July 1, 2023, to December 1, 2023. Exposures: The primary exposures were hospital quality and sex. For hospital quality, hospitals were placed into rank order by their overall risk-adjusted mortality rate and divided into quintiles. Main Outcome and Measures: Risk-adjusted 30-day mortality using a logistic regression model accounting for patient factors, including sex, age, comorbidities, elective vs unplanned admission, number of bypass grafts, use of arterial graft, and year of surgery. Results: A total of 444 855 beneficiaries (mean [SD] age, 71.5 [7.5] years; 120 333 [27.1%] female and 324 522 [72.9%] male) were studied. Compared with male beneficiaries, female beneficiaries were more likely to have an unplanned admission (66 425 [55.2%] vs 157 895 [48.7%], P < .001) and receive care at low-quality (vs high-quality) hospitals (odds ratio, 1.26; 95% CI, 1.23-1.29; P < .001). Overall, risk-adjusted female mortality was 4.24% (95% CI, 4.20%-4.27%), and male mortality was 2.75% (95% CI, 2.75%-2.77%), with an absolute difference of 1.48 (95% CI, 1.45-1.51) percentage points (P < .001). At the highest-quality hospitals, male mortality was 1.57% (95% CI, 1.56%-1.59%), and female mortality was 2.58% (95% CI, 2.54%-2.62%), with an absolute difference of 1.01 (95% CI, 0.97-1.04) percentage points (P < .001). At the lowest-quality hospitals, male mortality was 4.94% (95% CI, 4.88%-5.01%), and female mortality was 7.02% (95% CI, 6.90%-7.13%), with an absolute difference of 2.07 (95% CI, 1.95-2.19) percentage points (P < .001). Female beneficiaries receiving care at low-quality hospitals had a higher mortality than male beneficiaries receiving care at the high-quality hospitals (7.02% vs 1.57%, P < .001). Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study of Medicare beneficiaries undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting, female beneficiaries were more likely to receive care at low-quality hospitals, where the sex disparity in mortality was double that of high-quality hospitals. Quality improvement targeting low-quality hospitals as well as equitable referral of female beneficiaries to higher-quality hospitals may narrow the sex disparity after coronary artery bypass grafting.

Influenza Vaccination Requirements for Health Care Personnel in US Hospitals.

This survey study assesses changes from 2017 to 2021 in self-reported annual influenza vaccination among workers in nonfederal and Veterans Affairs hospitals.

Assessing nourishment problems at a hospital: what can we learn from them?

INTRODUCTION: Patient safety is a high priority in the Danish health care system, including that hospital patients get the proper nutrition during their stay. A Nutrition Committee at Odense University Hospital is responsible for policy regarding nourishment at the hospital. If patients experience suboptimal treatment, i.e. improper nourishment, in the Danish health care system, they have the right to file a complaint. These complaints enable the improvement potentials based on the patients' first hand experiences. Therefore, our aim was to examine the nutrition complaint pattern and to get a deeper understanding of the context surrounding nutrition problems, allowing the extraction of learning potentials. METHODS: We analysed complaints submitted to Odense University Hospital between 2018 and 2022 using the Healthcare Complaint Analysis Tool. The complaints were categorised into categories, levels of severity and overall patient harm. The complaints containing a high-severity nutrition problem were read through and thematised into aspects not defined in the Healthcare Complaint Analysis Tool. RESULTS: Between 2018 and 2022, 60 complaint cases containing 89 nutrition problems were filed to Odense University Hospital. Most (58.3%) of these were filed by the patients' relatives. The nutrition problems were mostly of low severity (56.2%), while 23.6% were severe, and 20.2% were very severe. The reading of 18 very severe nutrition complaints revealed a cascade of problems triggered by the nutrition problem in six cases. Moreover, we saw that two high-severity nutrition problems led to catastrophic harm. DISCUSSION: A low proportion of nutrition problems may express an underestimation regarding nourishment at the hospital. A patient's threshold may not be exceeded by suboptimal nutrition and therefore does not file a complaint. However, complaints contain important insights contributing to wider learning, given that improvements at the hospital so far are based on clinicians' reporting, overlooking the patient perspective.

Effect of interventions to improve safety culture on healthcare workers in hospital settings: a systematic review of the international literature.

BACKGROUND: In an era of safety systems, hospital interventions to build a culture of safety deliver organisational learning methodologies for staff. Their benefits to hospital staff are unknown. We examined the literature for evidence of staff outcomes. Research questions were: (1) how is safety culture defined in studies with interventions that aim to enhance it?; (2) what effects do interventions to improve safety culture have on hospital staff?; (3) what intervention features explain these effects? and (4) what staff outcomes and experiences are identified? METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We conducted a mixed-methods systematic review of published literature using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. The search was conducted in MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, Health Business Elite and Scopus. We adopted a convergent approach to synthesis and integration. Identified intervention and staff outcomes were categorised thematically and combined with available data on measures and effects. RESULTS: We identified 42 articles for inclusion. Safety culture outcomes were most prominent under the themes of leadership and teamwork. Specific benefits for staff included increased stress recognition and job satisfaction, reduced emotional exhaustion, burnout and turnover, and improvements to working conditions. Effects were documented for interventions with longer time scales, strong institutional support and comprehensive theory-informed designs situated within specific units. DISCUSSION: This review contributes to international evidence on how interventions to improve safety culture may benefit hospital staff and how they can be designed and implemented. A focus on staff outcomes includes staff perceptions and behaviours as part of a safety culture and staff experiences resulting from a safety culture. The results generated by a small number of articles varied in quality and effect, and the review focused only on hospital staff. There is merit in using the concept of safety culture as a lens to understand staff experience in a complex healthcare system.

The influence of hospital accreditation on nurses' perceptions of patient safety culture.

OBJECTIVES: Hospitals' accreditation process is carried out to enhance the quality of hospitals' care and patient safety practices as well. The current study aimed to investigate the influence of hospitals' accreditation on patient safety culture as perceived by Jordanian hospitals among nurses. METHODS: A descriptive cross-sectional correlational survey was used for the current study, where the data were obtained from 395 nurses by convenient sampling technique who were working in 3 accredited hospitals with 254 nurses, and 3 non-accredited hospitals with 141 nurses, with a response rate of 89%. RESULTS: The overall patient safety culture was (71.9%). Moreover, the results of the current study revealed that there were no statistically significant differences between the perceptions of nurses in accredited and non-accredited hospitals in terms of perceptions of patient safety culture. CONCLUSION: The current study will add new knowledge about nurses' perceptions of patient safety culture in both accredited and non-accredited hospitals in Jordan which in turn will provide valid evidence to healthcare stakeholders if the accreditation status positively affects the nurses' perceptions of patient safety culture or not. Continuous evaluation of the accreditation application needs to be carried out to improve healthcare services as well as quality and patient safety.

Lessons Learned from a National Hospital Antibiotic Stewardship Implementation Project.

BACKGROUND: The goal of antibiotic stewardship programs (ASPs) is to ensure that patients receive effective therapy while minimizing adverse events. To overcome barriers commonly faced in implementing successful ASPs, the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) established a multifaceted, nationwide Safety Program for Improving Antibiotic Use in 2018. This report summarizes the lessons learned from the implementation of this initiative based on structured interviews of personnel from participating sites. METHODS: At the completion of the one-year initiative, semistructured exit interviews were conducted with site leaders at 151 of the 402 hospitals that participated. These interviews consisted of open-ended questions about the perceived effectiveness of components of the Safety Program. Qualitative analyses incorporated both deductive coding themes (based on existing literature) and an iteratively developed inductive coding framework (based on salient themes that emerged from a subset of interviews). RESULTS: Several components of the Safety Program were identified as effective in expanding local stewardship activities, including techniques and strategies to implement sustainable ASPs, access to Implementation Advisors to keep sites engaged, provision of local benchmarked antibiotic use data to compare to similar hospitals, and Safety Program materials such as the antibiotic time-out tool to integrate stewardship techniques into daily work flows. The biggest challenges to greater effectiveness were suboptimal frontline staff engagement and difficulty changing antibiotic prescribing culture. Some approaches used to overcome these barriers (peer-to-peer communication and education through team huddles, identifying physician champions, informal rounds to enhance collegiality and buy-in, and engagement of hospital leadership) were identified. CONCLUSION: Lessons learned from the Safety Program can be applied by other teams looking to promote an effective ASP at their hospital or system. The themes that emerged in this study likely also have relevance across a wide range of large-scale quality improvement initiatives.

Calculation of Overall Hospital Quality Star Ratings With and Without Inclusion of the Peer Grouping Step.

Importance: The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) Overall Star Rating is widely used by patients and consumers, and there is continued stakeholder curiosity surrounding the inclusion of a peer grouping step, implemented to the 2021 Overall Star Rating methods. Objective: To calculate hospital star rating scores with and without the peer grouping step, with the former approach stratifying hospitals into 3-, 4-, and 5-measure group peer groups based on the number of measure groups with at least 3 reported measures. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional study used Care Compare website data from January 2023 for 3076 hospitals that received a star rating in 2023. Data were analyzed from April 2023 to December 2023. Exposure: Peer grouping vs no peer grouping. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was the distribution of star ratings, with 1 star being the lowest-performing hospitals and 5 stars, the highest. Analyses additionally identified the number of hospitals with a higher, lower, or identical star rating with the use of the peer grouping step compared with its nonuse, stratified by certain hospital characteristics. Results: Among 3076 hospitals that received a star rating in 2023, most were nonspecialty (1994 hospitals [64.8%]), nonteaching (1807 hospitals [58.7%]), non-safety net (2326 hospitals [75.6%]), non-critical access (2826 hospitals [91.9%]) hospitals with fewer than 200 beds (1822 hospitals [59.2%]) and located in an urban geographic designations (1935 hospitals [62.9%]). The presence of the peer grouping step resulted in 585 hospitals (19.0%) being assigned a different star rating than if the peer grouping step was absent, including considerably more hospitals receiving a higher star rating (517 hospitals) rather than a lower (68 hospitals) star rating. Hospital characteristics associated with a higher star rating included urbanicity (351 hospitals [67.9%]), non-safety net status (414 hospitals [80.1%]), and fewer than 200 beds (287 hospitals [55.6%]). Collectively, the presence of the peer grouping step supports a like-to-like comparison among hospitals and supports the ability of patients to assess overall hospital quality. Conclusions and Relevance: In this cross-sectional study, inclusion of the peer grouping in the CMS star rating method resulted in modest changes in hospital star ratings compared with application of the method without peer grouping. Given improvement in face validity and the close association between the current peer grouping approach and stakeholder needs for peer-comparison, the current CMS Overall Star Rating method allows for durable comparisons in hospital performance.

Past, present, and future of sustainable intensive care: narrative review and a large hospital system experience.

Healthcare systems are large contributors to global emissions, and intensive care units (ICUs) are a complex and resource-intensive component of these systems. Recent global movements in sustainability initiatives, led mostly by Europe and Oceania, have tried to mitigate ICUs' notable environmental impact with varying success. However, there exists a significant gap in the U.S. knowledge and published literature related to sustainability in the ICU. After a narrative review of the literature and related industry standards, we share our experience with a Green ICU initiative at a large hospital system in Texas. Our process has led to a 3-step pathway to inform similar initiatives for sustainable (green) critical care. This pathway involves (1) establishing a baseline by quantifying the status quo carbon footprint of the affected ICU as well as the cumulative footprint of all the ICUs in the healthcare system; (2) forming alliances and partnerships to target each major source of these pollutants and implement specific intervention programs that reduce the ICU-related greenhouse gas emissions and solid waste; and (3) finally to implement a systemwide Green ICU which requires the creation of multiple parallel pathways that marshal the resources at the grass-roots level to engage the ICU staff and institutionalize a mindset that recognizes and respects the impact of ICU functions on our environment. It is expected that such a systems-based multi-stakeholder approach would pave the way for improved sustainability in critical care.

Factors driving differences in the adoption of quality management practices among hospitals: A two-phase, sequential mixed-methods analysis.

BACKGROUND: Although all hospitals aim to deliver high-quality care, there is considerable variation in their adoption of quality management (QM) practices. Organizational and environmental factors are known to drive strategic decision-making in hospitals, but their impact on the adoption of QM practices remains unclear. PURPOSE: Our study aims to identify multiple organizational and environmental factors that explain variation in the adoption of QM practices among hospitals and to explore mechanisms underlying these relationships. METHODOLOGY: We conducted a two-phase, sequential mixed-methods study of German acute care hospitals. The quantitative phase used between-effects regressions to identify factors explaining variation in the number of QM practices adopted by hospitals from 2015 to 2019. The qualitative phase used semistructured interviews with quality managers to gain in-depth insights. RESULTS: The number of QM practices adopted by a hospital was significantly associated with factors like hospital size and the presence of an emergency department or QM steering committee. Our qualitative findings highlighted potential mechanisms such as the presence of an emergency department serving as a proxy for organizational complexity or urgency of case-mix. CONCLUSION: We provide an overview of factors driving QM adoption in hospitals, extending beyond the focus on single factors in previous research. Future studies could explore additional factors highlighted by our interviewees. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Our results can inform interventions to strengthen QM in hospitals and guide future research on this topic.

Hospital performance evaluation indicators: a scoping review.

BACKGROUND: Hospitals are the biggest consumers of health system budgets and hence measuring hospital performance by quantitative or qualitative accessible and reliable indicators is crucial. This review aimed to categorize and present a set of indicators for evaluating overall hospital performance. METHODS: We conducted a literature search across three databases, i.e., PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science, using possible keyword combinations. We included studies that explored hospital performance evaluation indicators from different dimensions. RESULTS: We included 91 English language studies published in the past 10 years. In total, 1161 indicators were extracted from the included studies. We classified the extracted indicators into 3 categories, 14 subcategories, 21 performance dimensions, and 110 main indicators. Finally, we presented a comprehensive set of indicators with regard to different performance dimensions and classified them based on what they indicate in the production process, i.e., input, process, output, outcome and impact. CONCLUSION: The findings provide a comprehensive set of indicators at different levels that can be used for hospital performance evaluation. Future studies can be conducted to validate and apply these indicators in different contexts. It seems that, depending on the specific conditions of each country, an appropriate set of indicators can be selected from this comprehensive list of indicators for use in the performance evaluation of hospitals in different settings.

Associations between patient safety culture and workplace safety culture in hospital settings.

BACKGROUND: Strong cultures of workplace safety and patient safety are both critical for advancing safety in healthcare and eliminating harm to both the healthcare workforce and patients. However, there is currently minimal published empirical evidence about the relationship between the perceptions of providers and staff on workplace safety culture and patient safety culture. METHODS: This study examined cross-sectional relationships between the core Surveys on Patient Safety Culture™ (SOPS®) Hospital Survey 2.0 patient safety culture measures and supplemental workplace safety culture measures. We used data from a pilot test in 2021 of the Workplace Safety Supplemental Item Set, which consisted of 6,684 respondents from 28 hospitals in 16 states. We performed multiple regressions to examine the relationships between the 11 patient safety culture measures and the 10 workplace safety culture measures. RESULTS: Sixty-nine (69) of 110 associations were statistically significant (mean standardized ß = 0.5; 0.58 < standardized ß < 0.95). The largest number of associations for the workplace safety culture measures with the patient safety culture measures were: (1) overall support from hospital leaders to ensure workplace safety; (2) being able to report workplace safety problems without negative consequences; and, (3) overall rating on workplace safety. The two associations with the strongest magnitude were between the overall rating on workplace safety and hospital management support for patient safety (standardized ß = 0.95) and hospital management support for workplace safety and hospital management support for patient safety (standardized ß = 0.93). CONCLUSIONS: Study results provide evidence that workplace safety culture and patient safety culture are fundamentally linked and both are vital to a strong and healthy culture of safety.

Trends in HCAHPS Survey Scores, 2008-2019: A Quality Improvement Perspective.

BACKGROUND: HCAHPS' 2008 initial public reporting, 2012 inclusion in the Hospital Value-Based Purchasing Program (HVBP), and 2015 inclusion in Hospital Star Ratings were intended to improve patient experiences. OBJECTIVES: Characterize pre-COVID-19 (2008-2019) trends in hospital consumer assessment of healthcare providers and systems (HCAHPS) scores. RESEARCH DESIGN: Describe HCAHPS score trends overall, by phase: (1) initial public reporting period (2008-2013), (2) first 2 years of HVBP (2013-2015), and (3) initial HCAHPS Star Ratings reporting (2015-2019); and by hospital characteristics (HCAHPS decile, ownership, size, teaching affiliation, and urban/rural). SUBJECTS: A total of 3909 HCAHPS-participating US hospitals. MEASURES: HCAHPS summary score (HCAHPS-SS) and 9 measures. RESULTS: The mean 2007-2019 HCAHPS-SS improvement in most-positive-category ("top-box") responses was +5.2 percentage points/pp across all hospitals (where differences of 5pp, 3pp, and 1pp are "large," "medium," and "small"). Improvement rate was largest in phase 1 (+0.8/pp/year vs. +0.2pp/year and +0.1pp/year for phases 2 and 3, respectively). Improvement was largest for Overall Rating of Hospital (+8.5pp), Discharge Information (+7.3pp), and Nurse Communication (+6.5pp), smallest for Doctor Communication (+0.8pp). Some measures improved notably through phases 2 and 3 (Nurse Communication, Staff Responsiveness, Overall Rating of Hospital), but others slowed or reversed in Phase 3 (Communication about Medicines, Quietness). Bottom-decile hospitals improved more than other hospitals for all measures. CONCLUSIONS: All HCAHPS measures improved rapidly 2008-2013, especially among low-performing (bottom-decile) hospitals, narrowing the range of performance and improving scores overall. This initial improvement may reflect widespread, general quality improvement (QI) efforts in lower-performing hospitals. Subsequent slower improvement following the introduction of HVBP and Star Ratings may have reflected targeted, resource-intensive QI in higher-performing hospitals.

Core elements of excellent hospital leadership: lessons from the five top-performing hospitals in China.

Substantial evidence indicates that leadership plays a critical role in an organization's success. Our study aims to conduct case studies on leadership attributes among China's five top-performing hospitals, examining their common practices. A semi-structured interview was conducted with 8 leaders, 39 managers, 19 doctors, and 16 nurses from the five sample hospitals in China. We collected information from these hospitals on the role of senior leadership, organizational governance, and social responsibility, aligning with the leadership assessment guidelines in the Baldrige Excellence Framework. Qualitative data underwent interpretation through content analysis, thematic analysis, and comparative analysis. This study adhered to the consolidated criteria for reporting qualitative research guidelines for reporting qualitative research. Our study revealed that the leaders of the five top-performing hospitals in China consistently established "Patient Needs First" as the core element of the hospital culture. Striving to build world-renowned hospitals with Chinese characteristics, the interviewees all believed strongly in scientific vigor, professionalism, and cooperative culture. The leaders adhered to a staff-centered approach, placing special emphasis on talent recruitment and development, creating a compensation system, and fostering a supportive environment conducive to enhancing medical knowledge, skills, and professional ethics. In terms of organizational governance, they continuously enhanced the communication between various departments and levels of staff, improved the quality and safety of medical care, and focused on innovative medical and scientific research, thereby establishing evidence-based, standardized hospital management with a feedback loop. Meanwhile, regarding social responsibility, they prioritized improvements in the quality of healthcare by providing international and domestic medical assistance, community outreach, and other programs. To a large extent, the excellent leadership of China's top-performing hospitals can be attributed to their commitment to a "Two-Pillared Hospital Culture," which prioritizes putting patient needs first and adopting a staff-centered approach. Furthermore, the leaders of these hospitals emphasize hospital performance, operations management, and social responsibility.

Effect on hospital incentive payments and quality performance of a hospital pay for performance (P4P) programme in Belgium.

BACKGROUND: Belgium initiated a hospital pay for performance (P4P) programme after a decade of fixed bonus budgets for "quality and safety contracts". This study examined the effect of P4P on hospital incentive payments, performance on quality measures, and the association between changes in quality performance and incentive payments over time. METHODS: The Belgian government provided information on fixed bonus budgets in 2013-2017 and hospital incentive payments as well as hospital performance on quality measures for the P4P programmes in 2018-2020. Descriptive analyses were conducted to map the financial repercussion between the two systems. A difference-in-difference analysis evaluated the association between quality indicator performance and received incentive payments over time. RESULTS: Data from 87 acute-care hospitals were analyzed. In the transition to a P4P programme, 29% of hospitals received lower incentive payments per bed. During the P4P years, quality performance scores increased yearly for 55% of hospitals and decreased yearly for 5% of hospitals. There was a significant larger drop in incentive payments for hospitals that scored above median with the start of the P4P programme. CONCLUSIONS: The transition from fixed bonus budgets for quality efforts to a new incentive payment in a P4P programme has led to more hospitals being financially impacted, although the effect is marginal given the small P4P budget. Quality indicators seem to improve over the years, but this does not correlate with an increase in reward per bed for all hospitals due to the closed nature of the budget.

A Longitudinal Study of Hospital Safety From Disasters in Kermanshah Province, Iran: Insights for Disaster Risk Reduction.

OBJECTIVE: The Hospital Safety Index (HSI) developed by the World Health Organization (WHO) was adopted by most countries to evaluate the safety of hospitals against disasters. This study aimed to assess the status of hospital safety from disasters between 2016 and 2022 in Kermanshah province in Iran. METHODS: This is a retrospective longitudinal study which investigated HSI data from 23 hospitals. Data were gathered by Farsi Hospital Safety Index (FHSI) and analyzed with a repeated measures analysis of variance (ANOVA). RESULTS: The risk of hydro-meteorological (from 43.1 to 32.7) and biological hazards (51.3 to 35.5) significantly decreased. Although structural safety remained constant (from 67.8 to 70.1), nonstructural (from 51.5 to 71.2), and functional (from 47.1 to 71.2) safety scores increased significantly over study period. CONCLUSIONS: The findings revealed hospitals safety in Kermanshah province gradually improved. However, the health-care stakeholders should pay the necessary attention to improving the structural safety of hospitals.