Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34390253›Full record

ArticleHealth services research2022

Consumer selection and home health agency quality and patient experience stars.

Margot L Schwartz, Momotazur Rahman, Kali S Thomas, R Tamara Konetzka, Vincent Mor

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Health services research, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Public Reporting and Consumer Demand in the Home Health Sector.Medical care research and review : MCRR · 2024
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Margot L SchwartzDivision of Health and Environment, Abt Associates, Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-1382-0716
Momotazur RahmanDepartment of Health Services Policy and Practice, Brown University School of Public Health, Providence, Rhode Island, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-8592-3511
Kali S ThomasDepartment of Health Services Policy and Practice, Brown University School of Public Health, Providence, Rhode Island, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-3436-2184
R Tamara KonetzkaDepartments of Public Health Sciences and Medicine, Biological Sciences Division, University of Chicago, Chicago, Illinois, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-3016-1318
Vincent MorDepartment of Health Services Policy and Practice, Brown University School of Public Health, Providence, Rhode Island, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-0084-1267

Funding

How do I Choose? Home Health Agency Star Ratings and Their Impact on Selection and OutcomesR36HS026440 · AHRQ · BROWN UNIVERSITY · PI SCHWARTZ, MARGOT L. · 2018 to 2018
$43k
AHRQ HHS R36 HS026440
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo compare the impact of the introduction of two distinct sets of star ratings, quality of care, and patient experience, on home health agency (HHA) selection. DATA SOURCES: We utilized 2014-2016 home health Outcome and Assessment Information Set (OASIS) assessments, as well as publicly reported data from the Home Health Compare website. DATA COLLECTION/EXTRACTION

methodsWe identified a 5% random sample of admissions (186,498 admissions) for new Medicare Fee-for-Service home health users. STUDY

designThis admission-level assessment compared HHA selection before (July 2014-June 2015) and after (February-December 2016) star ratings were published. We utilized a conditional logit, discrete choice model, which accounted for all HHAs that each patient could have selected (i.e., the choice set) based on ZIP codes. Our explanatory variables of interest were the interactions between star ratings and time period (pre/post stars). We stratified our analyses by race, admission source, and Medicaid eligibility. We adjusted for HHA characteristics and distance between patients' homes and HHAs. PRINCIPAL

findingsThe introduction of star ratings was associated with a 0.88-percentage-point increase in the probability of selecting a high-quality HHA and a 0.81-percentage-point increase in the probability of selecting a highly ranked patient experience HHA. Patients admitted from the community, and black and Medicare-Medicaid dual-eligible beneficiaries experienced larger increases in their likelihood of selecting high-rated agencies than inpatient, white, and nondual beneficiaries.

conclusionsThe introduction of quality of care and patient experience stars were associated with changes in HHA selection; however, the strength of these relationships was weaker than observed in other health care settings where a single star rating was reported. The introduction of star ratings may mitigate disparities in HHA selection. Our findings highlight the importance of reporting information about quality and satisfaction separately and conducting research to understand the mechanisms driving HHA selection.

Indexed as

Patient Outcome AssessmentAgedHome Care AgenciesHumansMedicareQuality Indicators, Health CareQuality of Health CareUnited Stateshome health carepatient experienceprovider selectionpublic reportingquality of carestar ratings

Identifiers

PMID34390253
PMCPMC8763285

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.