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  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Related articles  • Similar articles in this journal  Topic Collections  • Medical Practice, Other  • Quality of Care, Other  • Prognosis/ Outcomes  • Health Care Reform  • Alert me on articles by topic  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

Lenny López, MD, MPH; Leroi S. Hicks, MD, MPH; Amy P. Cohen, BA; Sylvia McKean, MD; Joel S. Weissman, PhD

Arch Intern Med. 2009;169(15):1389-1394.

Background  Little is known about the link between hospitalists and performance on hospital-level quality indicators.

Methods  From October 1, 2005, through September 31, 2006, we linked the Hospital Quality Alliance (HQA) data to the American Hospital Association data on the presence of hospitalists. Main outcome measures included composite measurements of hospital-level quality of care for 3 conditions (acute myocardial infarction [AMI], congestive heart failure [CHF], and pneumonia) and 2 dimensions of care (treatment and diagnosis, as well as counseling and prevention). We fitted a series of logistic regression models to examine the relationship between hospitalists and overall quality of care for each condition, controlling for all other hospital characteristics.

Results  Of 3619 hospitals reporting HQA data, 1461 (40.4%) had hospitalists. Hospitals with hospitalists tended to be large, private, not-for-profit, teaching institutions located in the southern United States. The mean unadjusted composite scores were higher for hospitals with hospitalists vs those with no hospitalists for all 3 conditions (93% vs 86% for AMI, 82% vs 72% for CHF, and 75% vs 71% for pneumonia) and both dimensions of care (87% vs 77% for treatment and diagnosis and 75% vs 66% for counseling and prevention) (P < .001 for all comparisons). After multivariable adjustment, hospitals with hospitalists continued to perform significantly better than those without hospitalists across all composite scores except for CHF.

Conclusion  Hospitals with hospitalists were associated with better performance on HQA indicators for AMI, pneumonia, and the domains of overall disease treatment and diagnosis, as well as counseling and prevention.

Author Affiliations: Institute for Health Policy and Department of Medicine, Massachusetts General Hospital (Drs López and Weissman), Division of General Internal Medicine and Academic Hospitalist Program, Brigham and Women’s Hospital (Drs López, Hicks, and McKean), Harvard School of Public Health (Ms Cohen and Dr Weissman), Department of Health Care Policy (Drs Hicks and Weissman) and Department of Medicine, Harvard Medical School (Drs López, Hicks, McKean, and Weissman), Boston, Massachusetts. Dr Weissman is currently at the Massachusetts Executive Office of Health and Human Services while on leave from Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard University.

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

RELATED ARTICLES

In This Issue of Archives of Internal Medicine
Arch Intern Med. 2009;169(15):1350.
FULL TEXT  

Do Hospitalists Improve Quality?
Robert M. Centor and Benjamin B. Taylor
Arch Intern Med. 2009;169(15):1351-1352.
EXTRACT | FULL TEXT  

THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN CITED BY OTHER ARTICLES

Do Hospitalists Improve Quality?
Centor and Taylor
Arch Intern Med 2009;169:1351-1352.
FULL TEXT