The CHS website claims that more than 100 of its hospitals are “Top Performers in Key Quality Measures®,” as measured by the “Joint Commission, a leading accrediting agency for healthcare organizations” (http://www.chs.net/…/top-performers-in-key-quality-measures/). However, even a shallow dive into the data raises some interesting questions when you consider how these same hospitals rank on Medicare Compare.
Let’s start at the top, with Mat-Su Regional Medical Center (https://www.medicare.gov/hospitalcompare/profile.html…). The Medicare Compare rankings show only average performance, with the one exception being patient experience—where Mat-Su ranked BELOW the national average according to patient survey data.
Things get even more problematic when you scroll down to Bayfront Punta Gorda in Florida. Patients give Bayfront the lowest possible rating—just one star (see https://www.medicare.gov/hospitalcompare/profile.html…). And yet CHS is claiming that its Punta Gorda facility—which is a sister to the CHS’ Venice Bayfront facility you may have read about yesterday with documented problems ranging from overflowing sewage to rats in its kitchen ceilings (as reported here and elsewhere: http://www.heraldtribune.com/…/venice-regional-hospitals-im…)—is a “top performer”?
Perhaps CHS can be forgiven since Medicare Compare and the Joint Commission use slightly different criteria. The Joint Commission, we should add, has discontinued its own methodology until a more rigorous standard can be applied. And so, we’ll dig farther into Medicare Compare’s nationally accepted ratings to see how reality fits with CHS views of quality.