Intelligence Unit Special Reports Special Events Subscribe Sponsored Departments Follow Us

Twitter Facebook LinkedIn RSS

Leapfrog's New Safety Report Card Alarms Hospitals



The updated Leapfrog Group Hospital Safety Score gave 25 hospitals, including 520-bed Ronald Reagan UCLA Medical Center in Los Angeles, a failing grade of F, while another 121 hospitals, including the Cleveland Clinic, got a barely passing D.



9 comments on "Leapfrog's New Safety Report Card Alarms Hospitals"
Roberta Hughes (12/1/2012 at 9:17 AM)

Interesting article, thank you for sharing. Whether LeapFrog rating system is flawed or not, it raises the awareness of patient safety and will influence where patients choose to receive care. As a healthcare image consultant, I "see" many safety and security issues. The appearance of healthcare professionals also impact patient safety. While on-site consulting with a client about their healthcare image and uniform program (or lack there of), a bomb threat occurred and 150,000 patient financial records were stolen. Hospital's relaxed uniform dress policies make it difficult to discern between patient and care provider, and between physician, nurse, or medical assistant, creating significant safety issues. While conducting an on-site image assessment, to the dismay of the hospital, we witnessed visitors enter restricted hospital areas. The appearance of the hospital and hospital staff play also play a key role in patient safety.
rn (11/30/2012 at 5:34 AM)

I communicated with LeapFrog and was impressed. I like the integrity of the people at LeapFrog. I think LeapFrog's compassionate ethics and skill comes across in the explanations and information given by Ms. Binder. The background of the people on staff at LeapFrog is superior and will give patients confidence in LeapFrog's opinions. Think about all the required patient safety defenses that UCLA doctors and administrators breach to receive an F from LeapFrog. UCLA's "F" is not about uninsured people draining the resources of a taxpayer funder hospital. An F from LeapFrog should frighten everyone into action – encouraging people to speak up and not let your family be a victim. Health care consumers' personal funds and taxpayer money should not result in preventable suffering. A score of F takes a "team effort" and bad leadership to become that bad and stay that bad. UCLA's organized pattern of patient abuse is beyond random chance and qualitatively different from negligence. LeapFrog's info. shows that the danger to patients is the quid pro quo amongst hospitals, health plans and California government that is supposed to be monitoring hospitals – especially taxpayer funded hospitals. Their tit-for-tat seems to include negligently retaining employees willing to harm patients. Other readers here may be interested in these MD's experience about UCLA. I think it will help people to understand how UCLA received an F Joseph A. Stirt, MD http://www.bookofjoe.com/2006/04/behindthemedspe_6.html www.anesthesiologyexpert.com/ Peter T Banos MD http://tryingforsense.blogspot.com/
concerned consumer (11/29/2012 at 7:04 PM)

I applaud what Leapfrog is trying to do, but what John Q. Public does not realize is that you cannot compare hospitals in the way Leapfrog is attempting. Their methodology does not take into account how sick or injured a patient is and they don't account for patients who don't follow doctors orders or who have language, cultural or socio-economic challenges. What Leapfrog doesn't tell the public is that they are a watchdog group funded by employers who want to use the scores to extort hospitals and insurance companies. As someone who lost their father because of an HCA-owned hospital's inappropriate care (that does not meet the legal definition of negligence), what I want to see is more transparency from regulatory bodies like CMS, the states and The Joint Commission. Any rating system from publicly-reported data is going to be skewed because the data is out-of-date by the time its published. Regulatory bodies are the ones who need to score hospitals and health systems, not an Angie's List type of organization like Leapfrog.
Shirlene Jones Garb├╝tt (11/29/2012 at 3:06 AM)

We lost our mother to wrongful death by the negligent hands of a doctor at Olive View Hospital. He performed an angiogram and punctured my mother's artery and caused her to bleed internally. She was sent to Ronald Reagan UCLA Medical Center to fix the problem but they could not fix it. Instead, UCLA covered things up. No one is held responsible for our mother's death. We live with this pain. Our family has first hand experience to the wrong that doctors and hospitals are doing. They lie to cover their tracks. On the other hand to show how prejudice UCLA Hospital is; my mother was at the same hospital that Michael Jackson went to (Ronald Reagan UCLA Medical Center). Well, a bereavement team was set up for Michael Jackson's family. No bereavement team was set up for us because my mother and family are not household names. Our mother mother may not be the queen of pop but she is the queen of our family and should be treated fair. After all, they killed her and the least they could do is offer our family the service that they provided to the Jackson's family. A bereavement team to help us through rough times. They did not even offer help or apologized. Ronald Reagan UCLA Medical Center is a public hospital and should be impartial. What is good for the goose is also good for the gander.
WJD (11/28/2012 at 11:45 PM)

It is very interesting to look at the data and see that UCLA Medical Center received an F yet appears to be low in a few areas, at the mid point in others and near the top in others. It also did not receive any credit for the Leapfrog specific data that it did not report. It is also ironic that each of the "experts" who developed the scoring methodology had "A" ratings for their home institutions (Stanford, University of Michigan, Brigham (Harvard's affliate)and Hopkins was not rated being in the State of Maryland).
anonymous (11/28/2012 at 5:07 PM)

While reporting safety measures and outcomes is an important criteria for any hospital, reporting this data must be done in a clear and objective fashion. Unfortunately, Leapfrog's methods of using dated information and disproportionately weighting certain criteria creates a skewed outcome that is simply inaccurate, leaving patients ill-informed. Every respected hospital is transparent in its efforts to improve patient safety and outcomes, and provides data to several recognized monitoring organizations. Leapfrog's methodology, which is criticized by the American Hospital Association, does not advance patient safety.
Todd (11/28/2012 at 3:57 PM)

Self-reported is better than nothing. Leapfrog is a step in the right direction. Ideally the Joint Commission would be the third party to verify safety since they obtain information during surveys. The JC could release tons of information tomorrow that would blow the public away. But the Joint Commission is not about to disclose negative information about hospitals that pay the JC tons of money for their surveys to obtain Accreditation.
anonymous (11/28/2012 at 12:29 PM)

Unfortunately, a large part of the Leapfrog score is self reported by the hospitals. Some hospitals are very meticuluos in their self reported results, while other facilities flat out lie. For example; as a healthcare quality professional, I know which hospitals really have closed ICUs with 100% intensivist managed care and those hospitals that do not provide this care, but self report 100% compliance.
elliem (11/28/2012 at 10:20 AM)

The hospitals are reacting to the Leapfrog Group's analysis in an immature way. Like the lady from Leapfrog said, the auto industry learned quickly to take what the rankings said and use it to sell cars. "They didn't waste their breath complaining, and it has ehlped quality in the auto industry improve. Why can't the medical industry take the information for what it is, work with the Leapfrog Group to improve the methods, and use it to their advantage to improve quality? What is the problem?