The Fund supports networks of state health policy decision makers to help identify, inspire, and inform policy leaders.
The Milbank Memorial Fund supports two state leadership programs for legislative and executive branch state government officials committed to improving population health.
The Fund identifies and shares policy ideas and analysis to advance state health leadership, strong primary care, and sustainable health care costs.
Keep up with news and updates from the Milbank Memorial Fund. And read the latest blogs from our thought leaders, including Fund President Christopher F. Koller.
The Fund publishes The Milbank Quarterly, as well as reports, issues briefs, and case studies on topics important to health policy leaders.
The Milbank Memorial Fund is is a foundation that works to improve population health and health equity.
June 2016 (Volume 94)
Quarterly Article
William B. Weeks
Gregory R. Kotzbauer
James N. Weinstein
Nov 5, 2024
Oct 30, 2024
Oct 23, 2024
Back to The Milbank Quarterly
Policy Points:
Context: In the United States, the transition from volume to value dominates discussions of health care reform. While shared decision making might help patients determine whether to get care, transparency in procedure- and hospital-specific value measures would help them determine where to get care.
Methods: Using Hospital Compare and Medicare expenditure data, we constructed a hospital-level measure of value from a numerator composed of quality-of-care measures (satisfaction, use of timely and effective care, and avoidance of harms) and a denominator composed of risk-adjusted 30-day episode-of-care expenditures for acute myocardial infarction (1,900 hospitals), coronary artery bypass grafting (884 hospitals), colectomy (1,252 hospitals), and hip replacement surgery (1,243 hospitals).
Findings: We found substantial variation in aggregate measures of quality, cost, and value at the hospital level. Value calculation provided additional richness when compared to assessment based on quality or cost alone: about 50% of hospitals in an extreme quality- (and about 65% more in an extreme cost-) quintile were in the same extreme value quintile. With the exception of coronary artery bypass grafting, higher-value hospitals were larger and had a higher average daily census than lower-value hospitals, but were no more likely to be accredited by the Joint Commission or to have a residency program accredited by the American Council of Graduate Medical Education.
Conclusions: While future efforts to compose value measures will certainly be modified and expanded to examine other reasons for admission, the construct that we present could allow patients to transparently compare procedure- and hospital-specific quality, spending, and value and empower them to decide where to obtain care.
Author(s): William B. Weeks, Gregory R. Kotzbauer, and James N. Weinstein
Keywords: value, quality, expenditures
Read on Wiley Online Library
Volume 94, Issue 2 (pages 314–333) DOI: 10.1111/1468-0009.12194 Published in 2016
