The authors describe the history and development of the CAHPS Hospital Survey (also known as HCAHPS) and its associated protocols. The randomized mode experiment, vendor training, and "dry runs" that set the stage for initial public reporting are described. The rapid linkage of HCAHPS data to annual payment updates ("pay for reporting") is noted, which in turn led to the participation of approximately 3,900 general acute care hospitals (about 90% of all such United States hospitals). The authors highlight the opportunities afforded by this publicly reported data on hospital inpatients' experiences and perceptions of care. These data, reported on www.hospitalcompare.hhs. gov, facilitate the national comparison of patients' perspectives of hospital care and can be used alone or in conjunction with other clinical and outcome measures. Potential benefits include increased transparency, improved consumer decision making, and increased incentives for the delivery of high-quality health care.
Objective. To Study Design/Data Collection/Extraction Methods. We estimated mode effects in linear models that predicted each HCAHPS outcome from hospital-fixed effects and patient-mix adjustors. Principal Findings. Patients randomized to the telephone and active interactive voice response (IVR) modes provided more positive evaluations than patients randomized to mail and mixed (mail with telephone follow-up) modes, with some effects equivalent to more than 30 percentile points in hospital rankings. Mode effects are consistent across hospitals and are generally larger than total patient-mix effects. Patient-mix adjustment accounts for any nonresponse bias that could have been addressed through weighting. Conclusions. Valid comparisons of hospital performance require that reported hospital scores be adjusted for survey mode and patient mix.
The CAHPS Hospital Survey is a core set of questions that can be administered as a stand-alone questionnaire or combined with a broader set of hospital specific items.
Using HCAHPS (Hospital Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems, also known as the CAHPS Hospital Survey) data from 2,684 hospitals, the authors compare the experiences of Hispanic, African American, Asian/Pacific Islander, American Indian/Alaska Native, and multiracial inpatients with those of non-Hispanic White inpatients to understand the roles of between- and within-hospital differences in patients' perspectives of hospital care. The study finds that, on average, non-Hispanic White inpatients receive care at hospitals that provide better experiences for all patients than the hospitals more often used by minority patients. Within hospitals, patient experiences are more similar by race/ethnicity, though some disparities do exist, especially for Asians. This research suggests that targeting hospitals that serve predominantly minority patients, improving the access of minority patients to better hospitals, and targeting the experiences of Asians within hospitals may be promising means of reducing disparities in patient experience.
Consumers and patients have a high degree of interest in hospital quality and found a very high proportion of the items being considered for the CAHPS Hospital Survey to be so important they would consider changing hospitals in response to information about them. Hospital choice may well be constrained for patients, but publicly reported information from a patient perspective can also be used to support patient discussions with facilities and physicians about how to ensure patients have the best hospital experience possible.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.