QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:
Home | Help | Feedback | Subscriptions | Archive | Search | Table of Contents

This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in ISI Web of Science Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via ISI Web of Science (18) Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Davies, H. T. O. Articles by Bindman, A. B. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation

Health Care Report Cards: Implications for Vulnerable Patient Groups and the Organizations Providing Them Care

A. Eugene Washington and Andrew B. Bindman
University of California, San Francisco

Abstract.

Standardized public reporting on the quality of health care (report cards) offers an opportunity to empower purchasers and consumers so that they can make choices that can result in better health care for less money. However, not all population subgroups are equally well served by the publication of such data. In particular, vulnerable patient groups such as the poor, the less educated, the chronically sick, and members of ethnic or linguistic minorities may find issues of importance to them largely neglected. In addition, the way that report card data are collected, analyzed, and presented may further marginalize the experiences of these groups who in any case are already underserved by the health system. This observation also has important implications for health care providers who serve primarily large numbers of vulnerable patients. The differential impacts of report card data on vulnerable patient groups (and their providers) need to be addressed by researchers and policy makers if access issues are not to be damaged further by the providers' pursuit of quality and value.

This article has been cited by other articles:

				S. M. Bernheim, J. S. Ross, H. M. Krumholz, and E. H. Bradley Influence of Patients' Socioeconomic Status on Clinical Management Decisions: A Qualitative Study Ann. Fam. Med, January 1, 2008; 6(1): 53 - 59. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				T. Higashi, N. S. Wenger, J. L. Adams, C. Fung, M. Roland, E. A. McGlynn, D. Reeves, S. M. Asch, E. A. Kerr, and P. G. Shekelle Relationship between Number of Medical Conditions and Quality of Care N. Engl. J. Med., June 14, 2007; 356(24): 2496 - 2504. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				L. P. Casalino, G. C. Alexander, L. Jin, and R. T. Konetzka General Internists' Views On Pay-For-Performance And Public Reporting Of Quality Scores: A National Survey Health Aff., March 1, 2007; 26(2): 492 - 499. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				D. G. Stevenson Is a public reporting approach appropriate for nursing home care? Journal of Health Politics Policy and Law, August 1, 2006; 31(4): 773 - 810. [Abstract] [PDF]

				N. G. Castle Nursing Home Administrators' Opinions of the Nursing Home Compare Web Site Gerontologist, June 1, 2005; 45(3): 299 - 308. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				N. G. Castle and T. J. Lowe Report Cards and Nursing Homes Gerontologist, February 1, 2005; 45(1): 48 - 67. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				A. M. Napoles-Springer, M. N. Fongwa, A. L. Stewart, G. Gildengorin, and E. J. Perez-Stable The Effectiveness of an Advance Notice Letter on the Recruitment of African Americans and Whites for a Mailed Patient Satisfaction Survey J Aging Health, November 1, 2004; 16(5_suppl): 124S - 136S. [Abstract] [PDF]

				N. Goldfield, S. Gnani, and A. Majeed Primary care in the United States: Profiling performance in primary care in the United States BMJ, April 5, 2003; 326(7392): 744 - 747. [Full Text] [PDF]

				A E Powell, H T O Davies, and R G Thomson Using routine comparative data to assess the quality of health care: understanding and avoiding common pitfalls Qual. Saf. Health Care, April 1, 2003; 12(2): 122 - 128. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]