5. Public Reporting as a Quality Improvement Strategy

Author
Year
Zinn
2008 98
11. Results: KQ1 (Health
Care Outcomes)
Short-Stay Residents
Delirium Risk Adjusted: 3.8,
3.2, 3.2, 3, 2.9
Walking for Short-Stay
Residents was not significant.
12. Results: KQ2
(Harms)
13. Results: KQ3 (Provider
Outcomes-QI & other
Behaviors)
None None Odd Ratios Results from
Logistic Regression
for Action Taken by Strategic
Orientation
(Defender, Prospector,
Analyzer Reactor) followed
by other significant variables
1. Immediate Response (Ref,
1.58**, 1.39*, 0.26**)
for profit status 0.62**;
Perceived completion 1.15*
2. No response to NHC
(1.62*, Ref., 0.96, 1.54)
Initial quality 0.89*; perceived
competition 0.79***
3. Discussed with residents
or families (Ref., 1.49, 1.24,
0.98, 0.96)
Chain affiliation 1.49+;
perceived competition
1.37***
4. Investigate reasons for
poor scores (Ref., 1.59**,
1.54*, 0.64)
initial quality 1.14*
5. Revise job descriptions
(Ref., 2.02**, 1.18, 0.52)
initial quality 1.21*; perceived
competition 1.21+
6. Change priorities for QI
(Ref., 1.89***, 1.67**, 0.84)
initial quality 1.10+
7. Invest in new technology
of equipment: none (0.83,
Ref., 1.63+, 0.43)
for-profit 1.57+; initial quality
1.14+
+p,.10, *p