Quality Reports Help Moms Prepare for Childbirth

Timely hospital quality information can help expectant mothers make decisions about labor and delivery and communicate more effectively with providers about their care preferences and concerns, according to the authors of a new AHRQ study. The authors used a randomized controlled trial to test the use of email and texts to deliver pertinent information timed to the specific week of the pregnancy. The biweekly messages directed the mothers to a website that provided videos and articles about quality information, tools to help them communicate with their providers, and ratings of local hospitals and pregnant women’s experiences at the hospitals. Participants became better informed about medical procedures, such as cesarean sections and episiotomies; discussed the information with family; and sought further information. They used the material to prepare for visits to doctors and midwives and to create a birth plan. The authors found that the timed dissemination of information was successful in getting the women to use it to inform and improve their care. The article, “Increasing the Use of Comparative Quality Information in Maternity Care: Results From a Randomized Controlled Trial,” was published in the journal Medical Care Research and Review. Access the abstract.

Increasing the Use of Comparative Quality Information in Maternity Care: Results From a Randomized Controlled Trial

Show all authors

Maureen Maurer , Kristin L. Carman, Manshu Yang, ...

First Published May 30, 2017 Research Article

Abstract

This randomized controlled trial tested an intervention to increase uptake of hospital-level maternity care quality reports among 245 pregnant women in North Carolina (123 treatment; 122 control). The intervention included three enhancements to the quality report offered to the control: (a) biweekly text messages or e-mails directing women to the website, (b) videos and materials describing the relevance of quality measures to pregnant women’s interests, and (c) tools to support discussions with clinicians. Compared with controls, intervention participants were significantly more likely to visit the website and report adopting behaviors to inform care, such as thinking through preferences, talking with their doctor, or creating a birth plan. Reports designed to put quality information into the larger context of what consumers want and need to know, along with targeted and timely communications, can increase consumer use of quality information and prompt them to talk with providers about care preferences and evidence-based practices.

References

	Abraham J., Feldman R., Carlin C. (2004). Understanding employee awareness of health care quality information: How can employers benefit? Health Services Research, 39, 1799-1815. Google Scholar CrossRef, Medline
	Abraham J., Sick B., Anderson J., Berg A., Dehmer C., Tufano A. (2011). Selecting a provider: What factors influence patients’ decision making? Journal of Healthcare Management, 56, 99-114. Google Scholar Medline
	Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. (n.d.). Talking quality. Retrieved from https://cahps.ahrq.gov/consumer-reporting/talkingquality/ Google Scholar
	Alexander J. A., Hearld L. R., Hasnain-Wynia R., Christianson J. B., Martsol G. R. (2011) Consumer trust in sources of physician quality information. Medical Care Research and Review, 68, 421-440. Google Scholar Link
	American Institutes for Research. (2010). How to display comparative information that people can understand and use. Retrieved from http://www.rwjf.org/content/dam/farm/reports/reports/2010/rwjf69342 Google Scholar
	Carman K. L. (2006, March). Improving quality information in a consumer-driven era: Showing the differences is crucial to informed consumer choice. Paper presented at the 10th National CAHPS User Group Meeting, Baltimore, MD. Google Scholar
	Carman K. L., Dardess P., Maurer M., Sofaer S., Adams K., Bechtel C., Sweeney J. (2013). Patient and family engagement: A framework for understanding the elements and developing interventions and policies. Health Affairs (Millwood), 32, 223-231. doi:10.1377/hlthaff.2012.1133 Google Scholar CrossRef, Medline
	Carman K. L., Maurer M., Yegian J. M., Dardess P., McGee J., Evers M., Marlo K. O. (2010). Evidence that consumers are skeptical about evidence-based health care. Health Affairs (Millwood), 29, 1400-1406. doi:10.1377/hlthaff.2009.0296 Google Scholar CrossRef, Medline
	Christianson J. B., Shaw B. W., Greene J., Scanlon D. P. (2016). Reporting provider performance: What can be learned from the experience of multi-stakeholder community coalitions? American Journal of Managed Care, 22, S382-S392. Google Scholar Medline
	Cohen J. (1992). A power primer. Psychological Bulletin, 112, 155-159. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.112.1.155 Google Scholar CrossRef, Medline
	Efird J. (2011). Blocked randomization with randomly selected block sizes. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 8, 15-20. doi:10.3390/ijerph8010015 Google Scholar CrossRef, Medline
	Fox S., Duggan M. (2013). Peer-to-peer health care. Retrieved from http://www.pewinternet.org/2013/01/15/peer-to-peer-health-care/ Google Scholar
	Hibbard J. H., Peters E. (2003). Supporting informed consumer health care decisions: Data presentation approaches that facilitate the use of information in choice. Annual Reviews of Public Health, 24, 413-433. doi:10.1146/annurev.publhealth.24.100901.141005 Google Scholar CrossRef, Medline
	Hu L., Bentler P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 6, 1-55. doi:10.1080/10705519909540118 Google Scholar CrossRef
	James J. (2012). Health policy brief: Public reporting on quality and costs. Retrieved from http://healthaffairs.org/healthpolicybriefs/brief_pdfs/healthpolicybrief_65.pdf Google Scholar
	Kaiser Family Foundation. (2008). 2008 Update on consumers’ views of patient safety and quality information. Retrieved from http://kff.org/health-reform/poll-finding/2008-update-on-consumers-views-of-patient-2/ Google Scholar
	Kaiser Family Foundation. (2011). Trends in the use of hospital and provider quality ratings. Retrieved from http://kff.org/health-reform/poll-finding/data-note-trends-in-the-use-of/ Google Scholar
	Kaiser Family Foundation. (2016). State health facts: Births financed by Medicaid. Retrieved from http://kff.org/medicaid/state-indicator/births-financed-by-medicaid/ Google Scholar
	Ketelaar N. A., Faber M. J., Flottorp S., Rygh L. H., Deane K. H., Eccles M. P. (2011). Public release of performance data in changing the behaviour of healthcare consumers, professionals or organisations. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. doi:10.1002/14651858.CD004538.pub2 Google Scholar CrossRef, Medline
	Maurer M., Firminger K., Dardess P., Ikeler K., Sofaer S., Carman K. L. (2016). Understanding consumer perceptions and awareness of hospital-based maternity care quality measures. Health Services Research, 51(Suppl. 2), 1188-1211. doi:10.1111/1475-6773.12472 Google Scholar CrossRef, Medline
	R Core Team. (2015). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. Retrieved from http://www.R-project.org/ Google Scholar
	Sinaiko A. D., Rosenthal M. B. (2010). Consumer experience with a tiered physician network: Early evidence. American Journal of Managed Care, 16, 123-130. Google Scholar Medline
	Suhr D. D. (2006). Exploratory or confirmatory factor analysis? SUGI Proceedings. Retrieved from http://www2.sas.com/proceedings/sugi31/200-31.pdf Google Scholar
	Totten A. M., Wagner J., Tiwari A., O’Haire C., Griffin J., Walker M. (2012). Public reporting as a quality improvement strategy: Closing the quality gap: Revisiting the state of the science (Evidence Report No. 208). Rockville, MD: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. Google Scholar
	U.S. Census Bureau. (2015). State and county QuickFacts: North Carolina. Retrieved from https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/table/PST045216/37 Google Scholar
	Yegian J. M., Dardess P., Shannon M., Carman K. L. (2013). Engaged patients will need comparative physician-level quality data and information about their out-of-pocket costs. Health Affairs (Millwood), 32, 328-337. doi:10.1377/hlthaff.2012.1077 Google Scholar CrossRef, Medline