The study authors examined the methodology for Consumers’ Checkbook and ProPublica rating websites among neurosurgeons and orthopedic spine, hip and knee surgeons. They searched for inaccuracies among surgeons at top-ranked hospitals. There were 510 surgeons queried in the study; 401 were orthopedic surgeons and 109 were neurosurgeons.
The researchers found:
1. Twenty-eight percent of the surgeons had data on Consumers’ Checkbook and 56 percent of surgeons had information on ProPublica.
2. Among the surgeons in top-ranked programs that had data, 17 percent had high complication rates and 13 percent had lower volume than other surgeons.
3. Seventy-nine percent of the physicians at top-ranked programs had three stars out of a possible five-star rating.
4. There wasn’t a significant correlation between the stars surgeons received from Consumers’ Checkbook and ProPublica’s adjusted complication rate for that surgeon. The complications on the site were “proxies of complication occurrence.”
5. The study authors concluded both surgeon rating sites “have significant methodological issues.”
“Neither site assessed complication occurrence, but rather readmission or prolonged length of stay. Risk adjustment was nonexistent,” the study authors reported. The rating algorithm methodology isn’t peer reviewed or subject to “appropriate scientific scrutiny.”
More articles on spine surgery:
Robotic vs. free-hand screw placement for spinal deformity: 5 things to know
3 spine & neurosurgeons on the move in January 2017
5 reasons why spine care will boom in the next decade
At the Becker's 23rd Annual Spine, Orthopedic and Pain Management-Driven ASC + The Future of Spine Conference, taking place June 11-13 in Chicago, spine surgeons, orthopedic leaders and ASC executives will come together to explore minimally invasive techniques, ASC growth strategies and innovations shaping the future of outpatient spine care. Apply for complimentary registration now.
