This Article  • Full text  • PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Citation map  • Citing articles on HighWire  • Citing articles on Web of Science (25)  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in this journal  Topic Collections  • Journalology/ Peer Review/ Authorship  • Quality of Care, Other  • Prognosis/ Outcomes  • Alert me on articles by topic  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

Craig R. Narins, MD; Ann M. Dozier, RN, PhD; Frederick S. Ling, MD; Wojciech Zareba, MD, PhD

Arch Intern Med. 2005;165:83-87.

Background  Public disclosure of physician-specific performance data is becoming increasingly common. However, the influence that public reporting of outcome data has on the delivery of care by physicians who are being assessed is not well understood.

Methods  Since 1994, the New York State Department of Health has collected and periodically published observed and risk-adjusted patient mortality rates for all interventional cardiologists practicing coronary angioplasty in the state. To assess the influence that these reports exert on the physicians being monitored, a questionnaire was administered in an anonymous manner to all interventional cardiologists included in the most recent report.

Results  The vast majority (79%) of interventional cardiologists agreed or strongly agreed that the publication of mortality statistics has, in certain instances, influenced their decision regarding whether to perform angioplasty on individual patients. Physicians expressed an increased reluctance to intervene in critically ill patients with high expected mortality rates. Among the respondents, 83% agreed or strongly agreed that patients who might benefit from angioplasty may not receive the procedure as a result of public reporting of physician-specific patients’ mortality rates. Additionally, 85% believed that the risk-adjustment model used in the Percutaneous Coronary Interventions (PCI) in New York State 1998-2000 report is not sufficient to avoid punishing physicians who perform higher-risk interventions.

Conclusions  Public reporting of physician-specific outcome data may influence physicians to withhold procedures from patients at higher risk, even when physicians believe that the procedure might be beneficial. This phenomenon should be recognized in the design and administration of physician performance profiles.

Author Affiliations: Cardiology Unit (Drs Narins, Ling, and Zareba) and Department of Community and Preventative Medicine (Dr Dozier), The University of Rochester School of Medicine and Dentistry, Rochester, NY.

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?

THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN CITED BY OTHER ARTICLES

Is There Evidence of Cream Skimming Among Nursing Homes Following the Publication of the Nursing Home Compare Report Card?
Mukamel et al.
The Gerontologist 2009;49:793-802.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Quality Information and Fragmented Markets: Patient Responses to Hospital Volume Thresholds
Kronebusch
Journal of Health Politics, Policy and Law 2009;34:777-827.
ABSTRACT  

The public health hazards of risk avoidance associated with public reporting of risk-adjusted outcomes in coronary intervention.
Resnic and Welt
J Am Coll Cardiol 2009;53:825-830.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Motivating Public Use of Physician-Level Performance Data: An Experiment on the Effects of Message and Mode
Ranganathan et al.
Med Care Res Rev 2009;66:68-81.
ABSTRACT  

Regulation, measurements and incentives. The experience in the US and UK: does context matter?
Hamblin
The Journal of the Royal Society for the Promotion of Health 2008;128:291-298.
ABSTRACT  

Does the choice of risk-adjustment model influence the outcome of surgeon-specific mortality analysis? A retrospective analysis of 14 637 patients under 31 surgeons
Grant et al.
Heart 2008;94:1044-1049.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Cumulative funnel plots for the early detection of interoperator variation: retrospective database analysis of observed versus predicted results of percutaneous coronary intervention
Kunadian et al.
BMJ 2008;336:931-934.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

The surgeon, the statistics and the data
Menicanti
Eur. J. Cardiothorac. Surg. 2008;33:323-324.
FULL TEXT  

Systematic Review: The Evidence That Publishing Patient Care Performance Data Improves Quality of Care
Fung et al.
ANN INTERN MED 2008;148:111-123.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Has the publication of cardiac surgery outcome data been associated with changes in practice in northwest England: an analysis of 25 730 patients undergoing CABG surgery under 30 surgeons over eight years
Bridgewater et al.
Heart 2007;93:744-748.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

General Internists' Views On Pay-For-Performance And Public Reporting Of Quality Scores: A National Survey
Casalino et al.
Health Aff (Millwood) 2007;26:492-499.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Enhancement of Claims Data to Improve Risk Adjustment of Hospital Mortality
Pine et al.
JAMA 2007;297:71-76.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Do Cardiac Surgery Report Cards Reduce Mortality? Assessing the Evidence
Epstein
Med Care Res Rev 2006;63:403-426.
ABSTRACT  

Multivariate prediction of major adverse cardiac events after 9914 percutaneous coronary interventions in the north west of England
Grayson et al.
Heart 2006;92:658-663.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Reply
Turi
J Am Coll Cardiol 2006;47:1737-1738.
FULL TEXT  

Strategies for improving surgical quality--should payers reward excellence or effort?
Birkmeyer and Birkmeyer
NEJM 2006;354:864-870.
FULL TEXT  

Coronary-Artery Bypass Grafting versus Stent Implantation
Flaherty et al.
NEJM 2005;353:735-737.
FULL TEXT  

Public Reporting and Case Selection for Percutaneous Coronary Interventions: An Analysis From Two Large Multicenter Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Databases
Moscucci et al.
J Am Coll Cardiol 2005;45:1759-1765.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

The Big Chill: The Deleterious Effects of Public Reporting on Access to Health Care for the Sickest Patients
Turi
J Am Coll Cardiol 2005;45:1766-1768.
FULL TEXT