{domain:"www.qualitydigest.com",server:"169.47.211.87"} Skip to main content

User account menu
Main navigation
  • Topics
    • Customer Care
    • FDA Compliance
    • Healthcare
    • Innovation
    • Lean
    • Management
    • Metrology
    • Operations
    • Risk Management
    • Six Sigma
    • Standards
    • Statistics
    • Supply Chain
    • Sustainability
    • Training
  • Videos/Webinars
    • All videos
    • Product Demos
    • Webinars
  • Advertise
    • Advertise
    • Submit B2B Press Release
    • Write for us
  • Metrology Hub
  • Training
  • Subscribe
  • Log in
Mobile Menu
  • Home
  • Topics
    • 3D Metrology-CMSC
    • Customer Care
    • FDA Compliance
    • Healthcare
    • Innovation
    • Lean
    • Management
    • Metrology
    • Operations
    • Risk Management
    • Six Sigma
    • Standards
    • Statistics
    • Supply Chain
    • Sustainability
    • Training
  • Login / Subscribe
  • More...
    • All Features
    • All News
    • All Videos
    • Contact
    • Training

Study: Mortality Rates Unreliable for Assessing Hospital Quality

Is quality in the eye of the beholder?

Harvard Medical School
Thu, 01/06/2011 - 05:00
  • Comment
  • RSS

Social Sharing block

  • Print
Body

(Harvard Medical School: Boston) -- Researchers at Harvard Medical School (HMA) and Massachusetts General Hospital have found wide disparities among four common measures of hospitalwide mortality rates, with competing methods yielding both higher and lower-than-expected rates for the same Massachusetts hospitals during the same year.

The findings, published Dec. 23, 2010, in a special article in the The New England Journal of Medicine, stoke a simmering debate over the value of hospitalwide mortality rates as a yardstick for health care quality. The measure, which compares a hospital’s actual patient death rate to statistical predictions, is reported publicly in countries including England, Canada, and Denmark, but some hospitals and policy experts have questioned its value due to the complexity and variability of diagnoses.

“It’s troubling that four different methods for calculating hospital mortality rates as a measure of quality should yield such different results,” says lead author David M. Shahian, HMS professor of surgery at Massachusetts General Hospital. “Measurement theory—not to mention plain common sense—suggests there is a problem.”

The potential of performance evaluation to improve both the quality and cost of health care has fueled interest in provider “report cards,” including mandates by state and federal law.

 …

Want to continue?
Log in or create a FREE account.
Enter your username or email address
Enter the password that accompanies your username.
By logging in you agree to receive communication from Quality Digest. Privacy Policy.
Create a FREE account
Forgot My Password

Add new comment

Image CAPTCHA
Enter the characters shown in the image.
Please login to comment.
      

© 2025 Quality Digest. Copyright on content held by Quality Digest or by individual authors. Contact Quality Digest for reprint information.
“Quality Digest" is a trademark owned by Quality Circle Institute Inc.

footer
  • Home
  • Print QD: 1995-2008
  • Print QD: 2008-2009
  • Videos
  • Privacy Policy
  • Write for us
footer second menu
  • Subscribe to Quality Digest
  • About Us
  • Contact Us