Abundance of Healthcare Quality Awards Weakens Marketing Value

One-third of US hospitals have garnered at least one distinction from a major rating group or company. With so many other organizations receiving similar accolades, how can promoting a top quality award have any real meaning?

I don't come across news articles or press releases touting a hospital or health system's quality scores as often as I used to. So when I came across an article about the quality measures that UT Southwestern Medical Center has decided to post on its website, it got me thinking.

First, the relative lack of media coverage must mean that most organizations are already listing their quality ratings online, are doing so quietly, or are moving away from the practice altogether .

Second, I was struck by this seeming contradiction: The medical center's chief quality officer told the reporter, "Some [health systems] put [quality data] out there for marketing reasons. We're just trying to help patients make choices about where they get their healthcare."

While statements like this aren't uncommon, I can't help but roll my eyes at a hospital leader telling a media outlet that he's not doing the thing that's being publicizing for marketing purposes.

But finally, and most importantly, I noticed that the article did not mention of the source of the quality metrics.

Upon further investigation on UT Southwestern's quality webpage, I discovered that it uses data from Hospital Compare, HCAHPS, Press Ganey, the University HealthSystem Consortium, the National Healthcare Safety Network, and the National Database of Nursing Quality Indicators.

Internet users must dig to find that information, however. Otherwise, the data is simply presented as averages for best practices/core measures, clinical outcomes, patient safety, and patient satisfaction. The website uses four symbols to indicate whether it ranked in the top 25% of academic medical centers, top 10%, average, or bottom 25%.

This methodology seems both too simple, and too complicated for the average consumer to understand. How can you take the average of a quality measure across six data sources and drill it down to four quality-representing symbols? Aside from it being iffy quality reporting, it doesn't make sense from a marketing perspective.

After a bit more digging, I discovered that UT Southwestern is not alone in these murky quality marketing waters, and the blame doesn't fall completely on hospitals.

The number of organizations ranking hospitals based on quality has proliferated in recent years, to the point that a high ranking is losing its value in the eyes of the public.

In fact, one-third of US hospitals—more than 1,600—won at least one distinction from a major rating group or company, according to a Kaiser Health News analysis. In the greater Fort Lauderdale hospital market, 21 of 24 hospitals were singled out as exemplary by at least one rating source. In the Baltimore region, 19 out of 22 hospitals won an award.

And hold on for a shocker: The increase in awards is partially due to the fact that many of the awarding organizations are making a profit on the distinctions.

See Also: Leapfrog's 'License Fees' for Promoting Hospital Scores Rankle

Healthgrades, U.S. News & World Report, and Leapfrog (a non-profit organization) encourage hospitals to promote the quality awards they have bestowed upon them and then charge licensing fees to hospitals that want to advertise their ranking.

According to an official at NYU Langone Medical Center, Healthgrades would have charged it $145,000 to use its logo on their website. U.S. News asked for upwards of $50,000 and Leapfrog $5,000 for hospitals with fewer than 300 beds and $12,500 for larger facilities. Leapfrog says it only charges to ensure that hospitals aren't misusing or misreporting their scores.

Consumer Reports bars hospitals from using its ratings in marketing, but patients must subscribe to read them online. The Joint Commission does not charge hospitals that make its top quality list.

"I worry a lot about these ratings," Jerod Loeb, executive vice president for healthcare quality evaluation at the Joint Commission, told Kaiser Health News. "They're all justifiable efforts to provide information, but at the end of the day every single one of them is flawed in some respect. Rather than enlightening, we may be confusing."

If even a top official from the Joint Commission thinks hospital rankings are confusing to the public, how can promoting a top quality award have any meaning—especially if so many other organizations are receiving similar accolades?

See Also: Leapfrog's Safety Report Card Alarms Hospitals

It's important for marketers to remember to go back to basics and really consider how to promote quality in a way that connects with the consumer: Tell patient stories. Be clear. And be transparent.

Quality is a top concern for most patients, but in a time when quality rankings are a dime a dozen, it's critical to make sure your organization stands out and your message sticks in the mind of the consumer.