News: Hospital rankings contradictory, cryptic, confusing

A research brief from the University of Michigan's Center for Healthcare Research & Transformation (CHRT) suggests that hospital rankings, ostensibly designed to enlighten healthcare consumers, have morphed into a confusing array of metrics and methodologies that are now largely ignored outside of the healthcare echo chamber.

"[W]e do have to take these rankings with a grain of salt because they measure different things and they do come out with different results when you compare them," says Kirsten Bondalapati, MPH, a co-author of the brief. "Another thing we need to think about is how the consumer or patient perspective fits into this.”

Some of the rankings are geared toward hospital quality improvements, and some are geared more toward patients, providing them information about what hospital to go to, says Bondalapati. One thing that could be improved is making those intentions a little clearer so we know what each ranking system is trying to do, she says.

The research brief examined nine prominent hospital rankings published each year and found that individual hospitals ranked all over the board.

Among the findings:

• In 2012, 37% of hospitals were highly ranked on one of nine hospital ranking systems
• In 2015, 53% of hospitals received a high rank on at least one of nine hospital ranking systems, but only 22.5% received a high rank on at least two ranking systems
• Consumers in a CHRT focus group said they don't use rankings to choose a hospital because the rankings do not always include information that they're interested in and are not presented in a consumer-friendly manner.

Much of the confusion could be cleared up if the ranking systems communicated with one another and standardized evaluation methods, says Bondalapati.

Editor’s note: This article was originally published in HealthLeaders Media.