Public disclosure of hospital clinicians’ performance data: insights from medical directors
Rachel Canaway
A B , Khic-Houy Prang A , Marie Bismark A , David Dunt A and Margaret Kelaher A C
A Centre for Health Policy, Melbourne School of Population and Global Health, The University of Melbourne, Vic. 3010, Australia. Email: khic-houy.prang@unimelb.edu.au; mbismark@unimelb.edu.au; d.dunt@unimelb.edu.au
B Department of General Practice, Melbourne Medical School, The University of Melbourne, Vic. 3010, Australia. Email: rachel.canaway@unimelb.edu.au
C Corresponding author. Email: mkelaher@unimelb.edu.au
Australian Health Review 44(2) 228-233 https://doi.org/10.1071/AH18128
Submitted: 21 June 2018 Accepted: 30 January 2019 Published: 12 July 2019
Abstract
Objective This study gathered information from public hospital chief medical officers to better understand underlying mechanisms through which public reporting affects institutional behavioural change and decision making towards quality improvement.
Methods This qualitative study used thematic analysis of 17 semistructured, in-depth interviews among a peak group of medical directors representing 26 health services in Victoria, Australia.
Results The medical directors indicated a high level of in-principle support for public reporting of identifiable, individual clinician-level data. However, they also described varying conceptual understanding of what public reporting of performance data is. Overall, they considered public reporting of individual clinicians’ performance data a means to improve health care quality, increase transparency and inform consumer healthcare decision making. Most identified caveats that would need to be met before such data should be publicly released, in particular the need to resolve issues around data quality and timeliness, context and interpretation and ethics. Acknowledgement of the public’s right to access individual clinician-level data was at odds with some medical directors’ belief that such reporting may diminish trust between clinicians and their employers, thus eroding rather than motivating quality improvement.
Conclusions Public reporting of identifiable individual healthcare clinicians’ performance data is an issue that merits robust research and debate given the effects such reporting may have on doctors and on hospital quality and safety.
What is known about the topic? The public reporting of individual clinician-level data is a mechanism used in some countries, but not in Australia, for increasing health care transparency and quality. Clinician-level public reporting of doctors’ performance attracts contention and debate in Australia.
What does this paper add? This paper informs debate around the public reporting of individual clinician-level performance data. Among a discrete cohort of senior hospital administrators in Victoria, Australia, there was strong in-principle support for such public reporting as a means to improve hospital quality and safety.
What are the implications for practitioners? Before public reporting of individual clinician performance data could occur in Australia, resolution of issues would be required relating to legality and ethics, data context and interpretation, data quality and timeliness.
References
[1] Duckett SJ, Collins J, Kamp M, Walker K. An improvement focus in public reporting: the Queensland approach. Med J Aust 2008; 189 616–17.| 19061447PubMed |
[2] Henderson A. Surgical report cards: the myth and the reality. Monash Bioeth Rev 2009; 28 20.01–20.
| Surgical report cards: the myth and the reality.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
[3] Neil DA, Clarke S, Oakley JG. Public reporting of individual surgeon performance information: United Kingdom developments and Australian issues. Med J Aust 2004; 181 266–8.
| 15347276PubMed |
[4] Keogh B, Spiegelhalter D, Bailey A, Roxburgh J, Magee P, Hilton C. The legacy of Bristol: public disclosure of individual surgeons’ results. BMJ 2004; 329 450–4.
| The legacy of Bristol: public disclosure of individual surgeons’ results.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 15321906PubMed |
[5] Duckett S, Cuddihy M, Newnham H. Targeting zero. Supporting the Victorian hospital system to eliminate avoidable harm and strengthen quality of care. Report of the review of hospital safety and quality assurance in Victoria. Melbourne: Victorian Government; 2016.
[6] Victorian Government, Department of Health and Human Services. Better, safer care: delivering a world-leading healthcare system. Melbourne: Victorian Government; 2016.
[7] Pearse J, Mazevska D. The impact of public disclosure of health performance data: an evidence check review brokered by the Sax Institute. Sydney: Sax Institute; 2010.
[8] Fung CH, Lim YW, Mattke S, Damberg C, Shekelle PG. Systematic review: the evidence that publishing patient care performance data improves quality of care. Ann Intern Med 2008; 148 111–23.
| Systematic review: the evidence that publishing patient care performance data improves quality of care.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 18195336PubMed |
[9] Cacace M, Ettelt S, Brereton L, Pedersen J, Nolte E. How health systems make available information on service providers: experience in seven countries. Cambridge: RAND Corporation; 2011. Available at: http://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/pubs/technical_reports/2011/RAND_TR887.pdf [verified 15 October 2018].
[10] Campanella P, Vukovic V, Parente P, Sulejmani A, Ricciardi W, Specchia ML. The impact of public reporting on clinical outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis. BMC Health Serv Res 2016; 16 296
| The impact of public reporting on clinical outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 27448999PubMed |
[11] Haas-Wilson D. Arrow and the information market failure in health care: the changing content and sources of health care information. J Health Polit Policy Law 2001; 26 1031–44.
| Arrow and the information market failure in health care: the changing content and sources of health care information.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 11765254PubMed |
[12] Berwick DM, James B, Coye MJ. Connections between quality measurement and improvement. Med Care 2003; 41 I-30–8.
| Connections between quality measurement and improvement.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
[13] Shekelle PG, Lim Y-W, Mattke S, Damberg C. Does public release of performance results improve quality of care? A systematic review. London: The Health Foundation; 2008.
[14] Dunt D, Prang K-H, Sabanovic H, Kelaher M. The impact of public performance reporting on market share, mortality, and patient mix outcomes associated with coronary artery bypass grafts and percutaneous coronary interventions (2000–2016): a systematic review and meta-analysis. Med Care 2018; 56 956–66.
| The impact of public performance reporting on market share, mortality, and patient mix outcomes associated with coronary artery bypass grafts and percutaneous coronary interventions (2000–2016): a systematic review and meta-analysis.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 30234769PubMed |
[15] Prang K-H, Canaway R, Bismark M, Dunt D, Kelaher M. The use of public performance reporting by general practitioners: a study of perceptions and referral behaviours. BMC Fam Pract 2018; 19 29
| The use of public performance reporting by general practitioners: a study of perceptions and referral behaviours.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 29433449PubMed |
[16] Canaway R, Bismark M, Dunt D, Kelaher M. Perceived barriers to effective implementation of public reporting of hospital performance data in Australia: a qualitative study. BMC Health Serv Res 2017; 17 391
| Perceived barriers to effective implementation of public reporting of hospital performance data in Australia: a qualitative study.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 28592277PubMed |
[17] Shahian DM, Edwards FH, Jacobs JP, Prager RL, Normand SL, Shewan CM, O’Brien SM, Peterson ED, Grover FL. Public reporting of cardiac surgery performance: Part 1 – history, rationale, consequences. Ann Thorac Surg 2011; 92 S2–11.
| Public reporting of cardiac surgery performance: Part 1 – history, rationale, consequences.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 21867789PubMed |
[18] Rechel B, McKee M, Haas M, Marchildon GP, Bousquet F, Blümel M, Geissler A, van Ginneken E, Ashton T, Saunes IS, Anell A, Quentin W, Saltman R, Culler S, Barnes A, Palm W, Nolte E. Public reporting on quality, waiting times and patient experience in 11 high-income countries. Health Policy 2016; 120 377–83.
| Public reporting on quality, waiting times and patient experience in 11 high-income countries.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 26964783PubMed |
[19] Mannion R, Braithwaite J. Unintended consequences of performance measurement in healthcare: 20 salutary lessons from the English National Health Service Intern Med J 2012; 42 569–74.
| Unintended consequences of performance measurement in healthcare: 20 salutary lessons from the English National Health ServiceCrossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 22616961PubMed |
[20] Sherman KL, Gordon EJ, Mahvi DM, Chung J, Bentrem DJ, Holl JL, Bilimoria KY. Surgeons’ perceptions of public reporting of hospital and individual surgeon quality. Med Care 2013; 51 1069–75.
| Surgeons’ perceptions of public reporting of hospital and individual surgeon quality.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 24226305PubMed |
[21] Behrendt K, Groene O. Mechanisms and effects of public reporting of surgeon outcomes: a systematic review of the literature. Health Policy 2016; 120 1151–61.
| Mechanisms and effects of public reporting of surgeon outcomes: a systematic review of the literature.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 27638232PubMed |
[22] Marasco SF, Ibrahim JE, Oakley J. Public disclosure of surgeon-specific report cards: current status of the debate. ANZ J Surg 2005; 75 1000–4.
| Public disclosure of surgeon-specific report cards: current status of the debate.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 16336397PubMed |
[23] Gallagher MP, Krumholz HM. Public reporting of hospital outcomes: a challenging road ahead. Med J Aust 2011; 194 658–60.
| 21692729PubMed |
[24] Canaway R, Bismark M, Dunt D, Prang K-H, Kelaher M. ‘What is meant by public?’: stakeholder views on strengthening impacts of public reporting of hospital performance data. Soc Sci Med 2018; 202 143–50.
| ‘What is meant by public?’: stakeholder views on strengthening impacts of public reporting of hospital performance data.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 29524870PubMed |
[25] Canaway R, Bismark M, Dunt D, Kelaher M. Public reporting of hospital performance data: views of senior medical directors in Victoria, Australia. Aust Health Rev 2017; 42 591–9.
| Public reporting of hospital performance data: views of senior medical directors in Victoria, Australia.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
[26] Canaway R, Bismark M, Dunt D, Kelaher M. Medical directors’ perspectives on strengthening hospital quality and safety. J Health Organ Manag 2017; 31 696–712.
| Medical directors’ perspectives on strengthening hospital quality and safety.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 29187081PubMed |
[27] Huntington D, Hort K. Public hospital governance in the Asia Pacific region – drivers of change. Manila: Asian Pacific Observatory on Health Systems and Policies, World Health Organization – Western Pacific Regional Office; 2015.
[28] Henke N, Kelsey T, Wately H. Transparency: the most powerful driver of health care improvement? McKinsey & Company; 2011. Available at: https://www.mckinsey.com/~/media/mckinsey/dotcom/client_service/Healthcare%20Systems%20and%20Services/Health%20International/Issue%2011%20new%20PDFs/HI11_64%20Transparency_noprint.ashx [verified 15 October 2018].
[29] Oakley J. Surgeon report cards, clinical realities, and the quality of patient care. Monash Bioeth Rev 2009; 28 21.1–6.
| Surgeon report cards, clinical realities, and the quality of patient care.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
[30] Scott IA, Ward M. Public reporting of hospital outcomes based on administrative data: risks and opportunities. Med J Aust 2006; 184 571–5.
| 16768665PubMed |
[31] Henderson A, Henderson S. Provision of a surgeon’s performance data for people considering elective surgery. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2015; 2 CD006327
[32] Minami CA, Dahlke A, Bilimoria KY. Public reporting in surgery: an emerging opportunity to improve care and inform patients. Ann Surg 2015; 261 241–2.
| Public reporting in surgery: an emerging opportunity to improve care and inform patients.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 25565124PubMed |
[33] Mukamel DB, Haeder SF, Weimer DL. Top-down and bottom-up approaches to health care quality: the impacts of regulation and report cards. Annu Rev Public Health 2014; 35 477–97.
| Top-down and bottom-up approaches to health care quality: the impacts of regulation and report cards.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 24159921PubMed |
[34] Hibbard JH, Sofaer S. Best practices in public reporting. No. 1: how to effectively present health care performance data to consumers. AHRQ Publication No. 10-0082-EF. Rockville, MD: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality; 2010.
[35] Ganai S. Disclosure of surgeon experience. World J Surg 2014; 38 1622–5.
| Disclosure of surgeon experience.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 24722865PubMed |
[36] Shahian DM, Edwards FH, Jacobs JP, Prager RL, Normand SL, Shewan CM, O’Brien SM, Peterson ED, Grover FL. Public reporting of cardiac surgery performance: Part 2 – implementation. Ann Thorac Surg 2011; 92 S12–23.
| Public reporting of cardiac surgery performance: Part 2 – implementation.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 21867788PubMed |
[37] Lindenauer PK, Lagu T, Ross JS, Pekow PS, Shatz A, Hannon N, Rothberg MB, Benjamin EM. Attitudes of hospital leaders toward publicly reported measures of health care quality. JAMA Intern Med 2014; 174 1904–11.
| Attitudes of hospital leaders toward publicly reported measures of health care quality.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 25286316PubMed |
