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.

Do Hospital Characteristics Predict Racial-and-Ethnic Disparities in Patient Experience? National Results From the HCAHPS Survey.

OBJECTIVE: Assess whether hospital characteristics associated with better patient experiences overall are also associated with smaller racial-and-ethnic disparities in inpatient experience. BACKGROUND: Hospitals that are smaller, non-profit, and serve high proportions of White patients tend to be high-performing overall, but it is not known whether these hospitals also have smaller racial-and-ethnic disparities in care. RESEARCH DESIGN: We used linear mixed-effect regression models to predict a summary measure that averaged eight Hospital CAHPS (HCAHPS) measures (Nurse Communication, Doctor Communication, Staff Responsiveness, Communication about Medicines, Discharge Information, Care Coordination, Hospital Cleanliness, and Quietness) from patient race-and-ethnicity, hospital characteristics (size, ownership, racial-and-ethnic patient-mix), and interactions of race-and-ethnicity with hospital characteristics. SUBJECTS: Inpatients discharged from 4,365 hospitals in 2021 who completed an HCAHPS survey ( N =2,288,862). RESULTS: While hospitals serving larger proportions of Black and Hispanic patients scored lower on all measures, racial-and-ethnic disparities were generally smaller for Black and Hispanic patients who received care from hospitals serving higher proportions of patients in their racial-and-ethnic group. Experiences overall were better in smaller and non-profit hospitals, but racial-and-ethnic differences were slightly larger. CONCLUSIONS: Large, for-profit hospitals and hospitals serving higher proportions of Black and Hispanic patients tend to be lower performing overall but have smaller disparities in patient experience. High-performing hospitals might look at low-performing hospitals for how to provide less disparate care whereas low-performing hospitals may look to high-performing hospitals for how to improve patient experience overall.

Performance of the Physical Functioning Activities of Daily Living Scale in the 2020 Medicare Health Outcomes Survey.

OBJECTIVE: Assessing functional limitations for adults at high risk of frailty yields valuable information for identifying those in need of therapy. We evaluate a self-report measure used to assess physical function among Medicare recipients in the United States. DESIGN: Secondary analysis of the 2020 Medicare Health Outcomes Survey. SETTING: A random sample of adult enrollees of 510 managed care plans. PARTICIPANTS: 287,476 adults (37% completion rate): 58% women; 16% were <65 years old (entitled via disability), 50% 65-74, and 34% 75 or older; 77% White, 14% Black, and 8% another race; 19% had

Narrative comments about pediatric inpatient experiences yield substantial information beyond answers to closed-ended CAHPS survey questions.

PURPOSE: Adults' comments on patient experience surveys explain variation in provider ratings, with negative comments providing more actionable information than positive comments. We investigate if narrative comments on the Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (CAHPS®) survey of inpatient pediatric care (Child HCAHPS) account for global perceptions of the hospital beyond that explained by reports about specific aspects of care. METHODS: We analyzed 545 comments from 927 Child HCAHPS surveys completed by parents and guardians of hospitalized children with at least a 24-h hospital stay from July 2017 to December 2020 at an urban children's hospital. Comments were coded for valence (positive/negative/mixed) and actionability and used to predict Overall Hospital Rating and Willingness to Recommend the Hospital along with Child HCAHPS composite scores. RESULTS: Comments were provided more often by White and more educated respondents. Negative comments and greater actionability of comments were significantly associated with Child HCAHPS global rating measures, controlling for responses to closed-ended questions, and child and respondent characteristics. Each explained an additional 8% of the variance in respondents' overall hospital ratings and an additional 5% in their willingness to recommend the hospital. CONCLUSIONS: Child HCAHPS narrative comment data provide significant additional information about what is important to parents and guardians during inpatient pediatric care beyond closed-ended composites. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Quality improvement efforts should include a review of narrative comments alongside closed-ended responses to help identify ways to improve inpatient care experiences. To promote health equity, comments should be encouraged for racial-and-ethnic minority patients and those with less educational attainment.

Measuring Equity in the Hospital Setting: An HCAHPS Application of the Health Equity Summary Score.

BACKGROUND: Health care quality varies by patient factors, including race-and-ethnicity and preferred language. Addressing inequities requires identifying them and incentivizing equity. OBJECTIVES: We apply an approach first implemented in the Medicare Advantage setting to measure equity in patient experiences by race-and-ethnicity [Asian American and Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander (AA and NHPI), Black, Hispanic, vs. White] and language preference (English-preferring vs. another-language-preferring). We identify characteristics of hospitals providing high-quality equitable care. RESEARCH DESIGN: We estimated, standardized, and combined performance measures into a Health Equity Summary Score (HESS) using 2016-2019 Hospital Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (HCAHPS) survey data. The HCAHPS HESS considered current cross-sectional performance, within-hospital improvement, and overall improvement by race-and-ethnicity and language preference. SUBJECTS: A total of 3333 US hospitals with 2019 HCAHPS Star Ratings. RESULTS: The HCAHPS HESS was calculable for 44% of hospitals. High-scoring (4-5 diamonds on a 1-diamond to 5-diamond scale) hospitals tended to be smaller than intermediate-scoring [3 diamonds (14% of high-scoring hospitals had <100 beds vs. 7% of intermediate-scoring hospitals, P <0.001) and were less often for-profit (20% vs. 31%, P <0.001)]. While a significant percentage (29%) of patients served by high-scoring hospitals were AA and NHPI, Black, or Hispanic, and 9% were another-language-preferring, there were smaller proportions of Black and Hispanic patients in high-scoring versus other hospitals. HESS performance was negatively associated with the percentage of patients preferring another language to English. HESS scores were moderately correlated with overall Star Ratings ( r =0.70). CONCLUSIONS: The HCAHPS HESS and practices of high-scoring hospitals could promote more equitable patient experiences.

Follow-Up Shadow Coaching Improves Primary Care Provider-Patient Interactions and Maintains Improvements When Conducted Regularly: A Spline Model Analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Shadow coaching improves provider-patient interactions, as measured by CG-CAHPS® overall provider rating (OPR) and provider communication (PC). However, these improvements erode over time. AIM: Examine whether a second coaching session (re-coaching) improves and sustains patient experience. SETTING: Large, urban Federally Qualified Health Center PROGRAM: Trained providers observed patient care by colleagues and provided suggestions for improvement. Providers with OPRs<90 (0-100-point scale) were eligible. EVALUATION: We used stratified randomization based on provider type and OPR to assign half of the 40 eligible providers to re-coaching. For OPR and PC, we fit mixed-effects regression models with random-effects for provider (level of treatment assignment) and fixed-effects for time (linear spline with knots and possible "jump" at initial coaching and re-coaching), previous OPR, patient characteristics, and sites. We observed a statistically significant medium jump among re-coached providers after re-coaching on OPR (3.7 points) and PC (3.5 points); differences of 1, 3, and ≥5-points for CAHPS measures are considered small, medium, and large. Improvements from re-coaching persisted for 12 months for OPR and 8 months for PC. DISCUSSION: Re-coaching improved patient experience more than initial coaching, suggesting the reactivation of knowledge from initial coaching. However, re-coaching gains also eroded. Coaching should occur every 6 to 12 months to maintain behaviors and scores.

Shadow Coaching Improves Patient Experience for English-Preferring Patients but not for Spanish-Preferring Patients.

BACKGROUND: Shadow coaching, a type of one-on-one provider counseling by trained peers, is an effective strategy for improving provider behaviors and patient interactions, but its effects on improving patient experience for English- and Spanish-preferring patients is unknown. OBJECTIVE: Assess effects of shadow coaching on patient experience for English- and for Spanish-preferring patients. DESIGN: We analyzed 2012-2019 Clinician and Group Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (CG-CAHPS) data (n=46,089) from an urban Federally Qualified Health Center with 44 primary care practices and 320 providers. One-third (n=14,631) were Spanish-preferring patients. We fit mixed-effects regression models with random effects for provider (the level of treatment assignment) and fixed effects for time (a linear spline for time with a knot and "jump" at coaching date), patient characteristics, and site indicators, stratified by preferred language. PARTICIPANTS: The 74 providers who had a 6-month average top-box score on the CAHPS overall provider rating below 90 (on a 100-point scale) were shadow coached. Similar percentages of English-preferring (45%) and Spanish-preferring patients (43%) were seen by coached providers. INTERVENTION: Trained providers observed patient care by colleagues and provided suggestions for improvement. Verbal feedback was provided immediately after the observation and the participant received a written report summarizing the comments and recommendations from the coaching session. MAIN MEASURES: CG-CAHPS Visit Survey 2.0 provider communication composite and overall provider rating (0-100 scoring). KEY RESULTS: We found a statistically significant 2-point (small) jump in CAHPS provider communication and overall provider rating among English-preferring patients of coached providers. There was no evidence of a coaching effect on patient experience for Spanish-preferring patients. CONCLUSIONS: Coaching improved care experiences for English-preferring patients but may not have improved patient experience for Spanish-preferring patients. Selection and training of providers to communicate effectively with Spanish-preferring patients is needed to extend the benefits of shadow coaching to Spanish-preferring patients.

Exploring Which Patients Use Their Closest Emergency Departments Using Geocoded Data.

BACKGROUND: Each year, roughly 20% of U.S. adults visit an emergency department (ED), but little is known about patients' choice of ED. OBJECTIVES: Examine the discretion patients have to choose among EDs, characteristics associated with ED choice, and relationship between ED choice and self-reported care experiences of ED patients. METHODS: We surveyed adult patients discharged to the community (DTC) in January-March 2018 from 16 geographically dispersed hospital-based EDs, geocoded patient and hospital-based ED addresses within 100 miles of patient addresses, and calculated travel distances. We examined the likelihood of visiting the closest ED based on patient and ED characteristics. Linear regression models examined the association of choosing the closest ED with seven measures of patient experience of care (scaled 0-100), adjusting for patient characteristics. RESULTS: 43.6% of 4647 responding patients visited the ED nearest their home (on average, 5.7 miles away). Patients who chose a farther ED had more urgent conditions, were more educated, and were less likely to be non-Hispanic White. They were significantly more likely to have visited an ED in a higher-rated, metropolitan, network hospital with major teaching status, a cardiac intensive care unit, and a certified trauma center. Patients who chose a farther ED were more likely to recommend that ED, with "medium-to-large" differences in scores (+4.3% more selected "definitely yes", p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Fewer than half of patients visited the closest ED. Patients who chose a farther ED tended to seek higher-rated hospitals and report more favorable experiences.

Non-Suicidal Self-Injury Among Adolescents: A Structural Model with Socioecological Connectedness, Bullying Victimization, and Depression.

The objective was to examine the associations of socioecological connectedness with bullying victimization and depressive symptoms in early adolescence and with non-suicidal self-injury (NSSI) in mid-adolescence, and how these might differ between genders. Diverse adolescents (N = 4115; 49.1% girls) in the 7th grade reported on connections with parents/family, peers, school, and neighborhood, as well as bullying victimization and depressive symptoms, and NSSI in 10th grade (Me = 16.1 years). Structural equation modeling with WSLMV indicated that the lower likelihood of NSSI in 10th grade was associated with higher perceptions of connections between adolescents and their families, both directly as well as indirectly through reduced bully victimization and depressive symptoms three years earlier. Higher school connectedness was indirectly associated with the lower likelihood of NSSI through bullying victimization and depressive symptoms. Paths to NSSI varied for girls and boys. Results advance the understanding of developmental pathways leading to NSSI in adolescent girls and boys.

Patient Experience for Hispanic Older Adults Varies by Language Preference.

BACKGROUND: Hispanic people with Medicare report worse patient experiences than non-Hispanic White counterparts. However, little research examines how these disparities may vary by language preference (English/Spanish). OBJECTIVES: Using Medicare Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (CAHPS) survey data, assess whether 2014-2018 disparities in patient experiences for Hispanic people with Medicare vary by language preference. RESEARCH DESIGN: We fit a series of linear, case-mix adjusted models predicting Medicare CAHPS measures by race/ethnicity/language preference (Hispanic Spanish-respondents; Hispanic Spanish-preferring English-respondents; Hispanic English-preferring respondents; and non-Hispanic White English-respondents). SUBJECTS: A total of 1,006,543 Hispanic and non-Hispanic White respondents to the Medicare 2014-2018 CAHPS surveys. RESULTS: There were disparities for all Hispanic groups relative to non-Hispanic White English-respondents. Hispanic Spanish-preferring English-respondents reported worse experience than Hispanic Spanish-respondents for getting care quickly (-8 points), getting needed care (-5 points), doctor communication (-2 points), and customer service (-1 point), but better experiences for flu immunization (+2 points). Similarly, Hispanic Spanish-preferring English-respondents reported worse experience than Hispanic English-preferring respondents for getting care quickly (-4 points) and getting needed care (-2 points). Hispanic English-preferring respondents reported worse experience than Hispanic Spanish-respondents for getting care quickly (-4 points), getting needed care (-3 points), doctor communication and customer service (-2 points each), but better experience for flu immunization (+2 points). CONCLUSIONS: Regardless of language preference, Hispanic people with Medicare experience disparities in patient care relative to non-Hispanic White English-preferring counterparts. Hispanic Spanish-preferring English-respondents report the worse experiences, followed by Hispanic English-preferring respondents. Hispanic Spanish-respondents experienced the least disparities of the three Hispanic language subgroups.

Disparities in Care Experienced by Older Hispanic Medicare Beneficiaries in Urban and Rural Areas.

BACKGROUND: Hispanic older adults face substantial health disparities compared with non-Hispanic-White (hereafter "White") older adults. To the extent that these disparities stem from cultural and language barriers faced by Hispanic people, they may be compounded by residence in rural areas. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to investigate possible interactions between Hispanic ethnicity and rural residence in predicting the health care experiences of older adults in the United States, and whether disparities in care for rural Hispanic older adults differ in Medicare Advantage versus Medicare Fee-for-Service. SUBJECTS: Medicare beneficiaries age 65 years and older who responded to the 2017-2018 nationally representative Medicare Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (CAHPS) surveys. METHODS: We fit a series of linear, case-mix-adjusted models predicting Medicare CAHPS measures of patient experience (rescaled to a 0-100 scale) from ethnicity, place of residence, and Medicare coverage type. RESULTS: In all residential areas, Hispanic beneficiaries reported worse experiences with getting needed care (-3 points), getting care quickly (-4 points), and care coordination (-1 point) than White beneficiaries (all P's<0.001). In rural areas only, Hispanic beneficiaries reported significantly worse experiences than White beneficiaries on doctor communication and customer services (-3 and -9 points, respectively, P<0.05). Tests of a 3-way interaction between ethnicity, rural residence, and coverage type were nonsignificant. CONCLUSIONS: There is a need to improve access to care and care coordination for Hispanic beneficiaries overall and doctor-patient communication and customer service for rural Hispanic beneficiaries. Strategies for addressing deficits faced by rural Hispanics may involve cultural competency training and provision of language-appropriate services for beneficiaries (perhaps as telehealth services).

The Contribution of First-name Information to the Accuracy of Racial-and-Ethnic Imputations Varies by Sex and Race-and-Ethnicity Among Medicare Beneficiaries.

BACKGROUND: Data on race-and-ethnicity that are needed to measure health equity are often limited or missing. The importance of first name and sex in predicting race-and-ethnicity is not well understood. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to compare the contribution of first-name information to the accuracy of basic and more complex racial-and-ethnic imputations that incorporate surname information. RESEARCH DESIGN: We imputed race-and-ethnicity in a sample of Medicare beneficiaries under 2 scenarios: (1) with only sparse predictors (name, address, sex) and (2) with a rich set (adding limited administrative race-and-ethnicity, demographics, and insurance). SUBJECTS: A total of 284,627 Medicare beneficiaries who completed the 2014 Medicare Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems survey and reported race-and-ethnicity were included. RESULTS: Hispanic, non-Hispanic Asian/Pacific Islander, and non-Hispanic White racial-and-ethnic imputations are more accurate for males than females under both sparse-predictor and rich-predictor scenarios; adding first-name information increases accuracy more for females than males. In contrast, imputations of non-Hispanic Black race-and-ethnicity are similarly accurate for females and males, and first names increase accuracy equally for each sex in both sparse-predictor and rich-predictor scenarios. For all 4 racial-and-ethnic groups, incorporating first-name information improves prediction accuracy more under the sparse-predictor scenario than under the rich-predictor scenario. CONCLUSION: First-name information contributes more to the accuracy of racial-and-ethnic imputations in a sparse-predictor scenario than in a rich-predictor scenario and generally narrows sex gaps in accuracy of imputations.

Measuring Inconsistency in Quality Across Patient Groups to Target Quality Improvement.

BACKGROUND: Quality improvement (QI) may be aimed at improving care for all patients, or it may be targeted at only certain patient groups. Health care providers have little guidance when determining when targeted QI may be preferred. OBJECTIVES: The aim was to develop a method for quantifying performance inconsistency and guidelines for when inconsistency indicates targeted QI, which we apply to the performance of health plans for different patient groups. RESEARCH DESIGN AND MEASURES: Retrospective analysis of 7 Health Care Effectiveness Data and Information Set (HEDIS) measures of clinical care quality. SUBJECTS: All Medicare Advantage (MA) beneficiaries eligible for any of 7 HEDIS measures 2015-2018. RESULTS: MA plans with higher overall performance tended to be less inconsistent in their performance (r=-0.2) across groups defined by race-and-ethnicity and low-income status (ie, dual eligibility for Medicaid or receipt of Low-Income Subsidy). Plan characteristics were usually associated with only small differences in inconsistency. The characteristics associated with differences in consistency [eg, size, Health Maintenance Organization (HMO) status] were also associated with differences in overall performance. We identified 9 (of 363) plans that had large inconsistency in performance across groups (>0.8 SD) and investigated the reasons for inconsistency for 2 example plans. CONCLUSIONS: This newly developed inconsistency metric may help those designing and evaluating QI efforts to appropriately determine when targeted QI is preferred. It can be used in settings where performance varies across groups, which can be defined by patient characteristics, geographic areas, hospital wards, etc. Effectively targeting QI efforts is essential in today's resource-constrained health care environment.

A Systematic Review of Strategies to Enhance Response Rates and Representativeness of Patient Experience Surveys.

BACKGROUND: Data from surveys of patient care experiences are a cornerstone of public reporting and pay-for-performance initiatives. Recently, increasing concerns have been raised about survey response rates and how to promote equity by ensuring that responses represent the perspectives of all patients. OBJECTIVE: Review evidence on survey administration strategies to improve response rates and representativeness of patient surveys. RESEARCH DESIGN: Systematic review adhering to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. STUDY SELECTION: Forty peer-reviewed randomized experiments of administration protocols for patient experience surveys. RESULTS: Mail administration with telephone follow-up provides a median response rate benefit of 13% compared with mail-only or telephone-only. While surveys administered only by web typically result in lower response rates than those administered by mail or telephone (median difference in response rate: -21%, range: -44%, 0%), the limited evidence for a sequential web-mail-telephone mode suggests a potential response rate benefit over sequential mail-telephone (median: 4%, range: 2%, 5%). Telephone-only and sequential mixed modes including telephone may yield better representation across patient subgroups by age, insurance type, and race/ethnicity. Monetary incentives are associated with large increases in response rates (median increase: 12%, range: 7%, 20%). CONCLUSIONS: Sequential mixed-mode administration yields higher patient survey response rates than a single mode. Including telephone in sequential mixed-mode administration improves response among those with historically lower response rates; including web in mixed-mode administration may increase response at lower cost. Other promising strategies to improve response rates include in-person survey administration during hospital discharge, incentives, minimizing survey language complexity, and prenotification before survey administration.

Racial/Ethnic Differences in Emergency Department Utilization and Experience.

BACKGROUND: Previous work has demonstrated racial/ethnic differences in emergency department (ED) utilization, but less is known about racial/ethnic differences in the experience of care received during an ED visit. OBJECTIVE: To examine differences in self-reported healthcare utilization and experiences with ED care by patients' race/ethnicity. DESIGN: Adult ED patients discharged to community (DTC) were surveyed (response rate: 20.25%) using the Emergency Department Patient Experience of Care (EDPEC) DTC Survey. Linear regression was used to estimate case-mix-adjusted differences in patient experience between racial/ethnic groups. PARTICIPANTS: 3122 survey respondents who were discharged from the EDs of 50 hospitals nationwide January-March 2016. MAIN MEASURES: Six measures: getting timely care, doctor and nurse communication, communication about medications, receipt of sufficient information about test results, whether hospital staff discussed the patient's ability to receive follow-up care, and willingness to recommend the ED. KEY RESULTS: Black and Hispanic patients were significantly more likely than White patients to report visiting the ED for an ongoing health condition (40% Black, 30% Hispanic, 28% White, p<0.001), report having visited an ED 3+ times in the last 6 months (26% Black, 25% Hispanic, 19% White, p<0.001), and report not having a usual source of care (19% Black, 19% Hispanic, 8% White, p<0.001). Compared with White patients, Hispanic patients more often reported that hospital staff talked with them about their ability to receive needed follow-up care (+7.2 percentile points, p=0.038) and recommended the ED (+7.2 points, p=0.037); Hispanic and Black patients reported better doctor and nurse communication (+6.4 points, p=0.008; +4 points, p=0.036, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Hispanic and Black ED patients reported higher ED utilization, lacked a usual source of care, and reported better experience with ED care than White patients. Results may reflect differences in care delivery by staff and/or different expectations of ED care among Hispanic and Black patients.

National travel distances for emergency care.

BACKGROUND: Most emergency department (ED) patients arrive by their own transport and, for various reasons, may not choose the nearest ED. How far patients travel for ED treatment may reflect both patients' access to care and severity of illness. In this study, we aimed to examine the travel distance and travel time between a patient's home and ED they visited and investigate how these distances/times vary by patient and hospital characteristics. METHODS: We randomly sampled and collected data from 14,812 patients discharged to the community (DTC) between January and March 2016 from 50 hospital-based EDs nationwide. We geocoded and calculated the distance and travel time between patient and hospital-based ED addresses, examined the travel distances/ times between patients' home and the ED they visited, and used mixed-effects regression models to investigate how these distances/times vary by patient and hospital characteristics. RESULTS: Patients travelled an average of 8.0 (SD = 10.9) miles and 17.3 (SD = 18.0) driving minutes to the ED. Patients travelled significantly farther to avoid EDs in lower performing hospitals (p < 0.01) and in the West (p < 0.05) and Midwest (p < 0.05). Patients travelled farther when visiting EDs in rural areas. Younger patients travelled farther than older patients. CONCLUSIONS: Understanding how far patients are willing to travel is indicative of whether patient populations have adequate access to ED services. By showing that patients travel farther to avoid a low-performing hospital, we provide evidence that DTC patients likely do exercise some choice among EDs, indicating some market incentives for higher-quality care, even for some ED admissions. Understanding these issues will help policymakers better define access to ED care and assist in directing quality improvement efforts. To our knowledge, our study is the most comprehensive nationwide characterization of patient travel for ED treatment to date.

Adjustment of Patient Experience Surveys for How People Respond.

BACKGROUND: Patient surveys are the primary tool to measure patient experiences of care. Caution must be taken when analyzing these data, as responses can be influenced by factors that do not reflect the quality of care received. OBJECTIVES: To provide a practical overview of adjusting patient experience survey results to address bias related to patient case-mix, extreme response tendency, and mode of survey administration. RESEARCH DESIGN: We discuss options for adjustment for biases in how people respond to patient experience surveys. RESULTS: Case-mix adjustment (CMA) aims to compare provider performance that would have been observed if all providers had treated the same set of patients by removing the effects of patient characteristics that vary across providers. Extreme response tendency can bias the measurement of the disparities in patient experiences even after typical CMAs, since differences in patients' use of extreme response options may affect patient experience scores when they have a skewed distribution. Survey mode may affect scores for the provider entity being evaluated (eg, hospital) more than CMA if survey mode differs at the provider level. CONCLUSIONS: It is best practice to evaluate known source of bias when analyzing patient experience surveys. Failure to adjust for patient case-mix, extreme response tendency, and survey mode in patient experience surveys may lead to erroneous comparisons of providers.

Shadow Coaching Improves Patient Experience With Care, But Gains Erode Later.

BACKGROUND: Health care organizations strive to improve patient care experiences. Some use one-on-one provider counseling (shadow coaching) to identify and target modifiable provider behaviors. OBJECTIVE: We examined whether shadow coaching improves patient experience across 44 primary care practices in a large urban Federally Qualified Health Center. RESEARCH DESIGN: Seventy-four providers with "medium" (ie, slightly below average) overall provider ratings received coaching and were compared with 246 uncoached providers. We fit mixed-effects regression models with random effects for provider (level of treatment assignment) and fixed effects for time (linear spline with a knot and "jump" at coaching date), patient characteristics and site indicators. By design, coached providers performed worse at selection; models account for the very small (0.2 point) regression-to-the-mean effects. We assessed differential effects by coach. SUBJECTS: A total of 46,452 patients (from 320 providers) who completed the Clinician and Group Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (CG-CAHPS) Visit Survey 2.0. MEASURES: CAHPS overall provider rating and provider communication composite (scaled 0-100). RESULTS: Providers not chosen for coaching had a nonsignificant change in performance during the period when selected providers were coached. We observed a statistically significant 2-point (small-to-medium) jump among coached providers after coaching on the CAHPS overall provider rating and provider communication score. However, these gains disappeared after 2.5 years; effects differed by coach. CONCLUSIONS: Shadow coaching improved providers' overall performance and communication immediately after being coached. Regularly planned shadow coaching "booster" sessions might maintain or even increase the improvement gained in patient experience scores, but research examining additional coaching and optimal implementation is needed.

Rates of Disenrollment From Medicare Advantage Plans Are Higher for Racial/Ethnic Minority Beneficiaries.

BACKGROUND: Each year, about 10% of Medicare Advantage (MA) enrollees voluntarily switch to another MA contract, while another 2% voluntarily switch from MA to fee-for-service Medicare. Voluntary disenrollment from MA plans is related to beneficiaries' negative experiences with their plan, disrupts the continuity of care, and conflicts with goals to reduce Medicare costs. Little is known about racial/ethnic disparities in voluntary disenrollment from MA plans. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to investigate differences in rates of voluntary disenrollment from MA plans by race/ethnicity. SUBJECTS: A total of 116,770,319 beneficiaries enrolled in 736 MA plans in 2015. METHODS: Differences in rates of disenrollment across racial/ethnic groups [Asian or Pacific Islander (API), Black, Hispanic, and White] were summarized using 4 types of logistic regression models: adjusted and unadjusted models estimating overall differences and adjusted and unadjusted models estimating within-plan differences. Unadjusted overall models included only racial/ethnic group probabilities as predictors. Adjusted overall models added age, sex, dual eligibility, disability, and state of residence as control variables. Between-plan differences were estimated by subtracting within-plan differences from overall differences. RESULTS: Adjusted rates of disenrollment were significantly (P<0.001) higher for Hispanic (+1.2 percentage points), Black (+1.2 percentage points), and API beneficiaries (+2.4 percentage points) than for Whites. Within states, all 3 racial/ethnic minority groups tended to be concentrated in higher disenrollment plans. Within plans, API beneficiaries voluntarily disenrolled considerably more often than otherwise similar White beneficiaries. CONCLUSION: These findings suggest the need to address cost, information, and other factors that may create barriers to racial/ethnic minority beneficiaries' enrollment in plans with lower overall disenrollment rates.

Hospice Care Experiences Among Cancer Patients and Their Caregivers.

BACKGROUND: Little is known about the current quality of care for hospice cancer patients and how it varies across hospice programs in the USA. OBJECTIVE: To examine hospice care experiences among decedents with a primary cancer diagnosis and their family caregivers, comparing quality across settings of hospice care. DESIGN: We analyzed data from the Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems Hospice Survey (32% response rate). Top-box outcomes (0-100) were calculated overall and by care setting, adjusting for survey mode and patient case mix. PARTICIPANTS: Two hundred seventeen thousand five hundred ninety-six caregiver respondents whose family member had a primary cancer diagnosis and died in 2017 or 2018 while receiving hospice care from 2,890 hospices nationwide. MAIN MEASURES: Outcomes (0-100 scale) included 8 National Quality Forum-endorsed quality measures, as well as responses to 4 survey questions assessing whether needs were met for specific symptoms (pain, dyspnea, constipation, anxiety/sadness). KEY RESULTS: Quality measure scores ranged from 74.9 (Getting Hospice Care Training measure) to 89.5 (Treating Family Member with Respect measure). The overall score for Getting Help for Symptoms was 75.1 with item scores within this measure ranging from 60.6 (getting needed help for feelings of anxiety or sadness) to 84.5 (getting needed help for pain). Measure scores varied significantly across settings and differences were large in magnitude, with caregivers of decedents who received care in a nursing home (NH) or assisted living facility (ALF) setting consistently reporting poorer quality of care. CONCLUSIONS: Important opportunities exist to improve hospice care for symptom palliation and providing training for caregivers when their family members are at home or in an ALF setting. Efforts to improve care for cancer patients in the NH and ALF setting are especially needed.