Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29696561›Full record

ArticleJournal of general internal medicine2018

Comparing Quality of Care in Veterans Affairs and Non-Veterans Affairs Settings.

Rebecca Anhang Price, Elizabeth M Sloss, Matthew Cefalu, Carrie M Farmer, Peter S Hussey

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of general internal medicine, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 60 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
60citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

60 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Observational
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Rebecca Anhang PriceRAND Corporation, Arlington, VA, USA. ranhangp@rand.org.
Elizabeth M SlossRAND Corporation, Arlington, VA, USA.
Matthew CefaluRAND Corporation, Santa Monica, CA, USA.
Carrie M FarmerRAND Corporation, Pittsburgh, PA, USA.
Peter S HusseyRAND Corporation, Boston, MA, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundCongress, veterans' groups, and the press have expressed concerns that access to care and quality of care in Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) settings are inferior to access and quality in non-VA settings.

objectiveTo assess quality of outpatient and inpatient care in VA at the national level and facility level and to compare performance between VA and non-VA settings using recent performance measure data. MAIN MEASURES: We assessed Patient Safety Indicators (PSIs), 30-day risk-standardized mortality and readmission measures, and ORYX measures for inpatient safety and effectiveness; Healthcare Effectiveness Data and Information Set (HEDIS®) measures for outpatient effectiveness; and Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems Hospital Survey (HCAHPS) and Survey of Healthcare Experiences of Patients (SHEP) survey measures for inpatient patient-centeredness. For inpatient care, we used propensity score matching to identify a subset of non-VA hospitals that were comparable to VA hospitals. KEY

resultsVA hospitals performed on average the same as or significantly better than non-VA hospitals on all six measures of inpatient safety, all three inpatient mortality measures, and 12 inpatient effectiveness measures, but significantly worse than non-VA hospitals on three readmission measures and two effectiveness measures. The performance of VA facilities was significantly better than commercial HMOs and Medicaid HMOs for all 16 outpatient effectiveness measures and for Medicare HMOs, it was significantly better for 14 measures and did not differ for two measures. High variation across VA facilities in the performance of some quality measures was observed, although variation was even greater among non-VA facilities.

conclusionsThe VA system performed similarly or better than the non-VA system on most of the nationally recognized measures of inpatient and outpatient care quality, but high variation across VA facilities indicates a need for targeted quality improvement.

Indexed as

Quality of Health CareHealth Care SurveysHospital Bed CapacityHospitalizationHospital MortalityHospitals, VeteransHumansOutpatient Clinics, HospitalPatient SafetyQuality Indicators, Health CareUnited StatesUnited States Department of Veterans AffairsqualityveteransVeterans AffairsVeterans Health Administration

Identifiers

PMID29696561
PMCPMC6153237

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.