Correlation of Subjective Hospital Compare Metrics With Objective Outcomes of Cranial Neurosurgical Procedures in New York State

BACKGROUND: Public reporting is at the forefront of health care reform. OBJECTIVE: To investigate whether patient satisfaction as expressed in a public reporting platform correlates with objective outcomes for cranial neurosurgery patients. METHODS: We performed a cohort study involving patients undergoing cranial neurosurgery from 2009 to 2013 who were registered in the Statewide Planning and Research Cooperative System database. This cohort was merged with the corresponding data from the Centers forMedicare and Medicaid Services Hospital Compare website. The association of patient satisfaction metrics with outcomes was examined with the use of a propensity adjusted regression model. RESULTS: Overall, 19 591 patients underwent cranial neurosurgery during the study. Using a propensity-adjusted multivariable regression analysis, we demonstrated that hospitals with a greater percentage of patient-assigned "high" scores had decreased mortality (OR, 0.60; 95% CI, 0.53-0.67), rate of discharge to rehabilitation (OR, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.88-0.98), length of stay (adjusted difference, -1.29; 95% CI, -1.46 to -1.13), and hospitalization charges (adjusted difference, -23%; 95% CI, -36% to -9%) after cranial neurosurgery. Similar associations were identified for hospitals with a higher percentage of patients, who would recommend these institutions to others. CONCLUSION: In a Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services Hospital Compare-Statewide Planning and Research Cooperative System merged dataset, we observed an association of higher performance in patient satisfaction measures with decreased mortality, rate of discharge to rehabilitation, hospitalization charges, and length of stay.