Open AccessReported effects of the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients 5‐tier rating system on US transplant centers: results of a national survey
Author(s) -
Van Pilsum Rasmussen Sarah E.,
Thomas Alvin G.,
GaronzikWang Jacqueline,
Henderson Macey L.,
Stith Sarah S.,
Segev Dorry L.,
Nicholas Lauren Hersch
Publication year - 2018
Publication title -
transplant international
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.998
H-Index - 82
eISSN - 1432-2277
pISSN - 0934-0874
DOI - 10.1111/tri.13282
Subject(s) - medicine , transplantation , family medicine , quality of life (healthcare) , logistic regression , nursing
Summary In the United States, the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients (SRTR) provides publicly available quality report cards. These reports have historically rated transplant programs using a 3‐tier system. In 2016, the SRTR temporarily transitioned to a 5‐tier system, which classified more programs as under‐performing. As part of a larger survey about transplant quality metrics, we surveyed members of the American Society of Transplant Surgeons and American Society of Transplantation ( N = 280 respondents) on transplant center experiences with patient and payer responses to the 5‐tier SRTR ratings. Over half of respondents ( n = 137, 52.1%) reported ≥1 negative effect of the new 5‐tier ranking system, including losing patients, losing insurers, increased concern among patients, and increased concern among referring providers. Few respondents ( n = 35, 13.7%) reported any positive effects of the 5‐tier ranking system. Lower SRTR‐reported scores on the 5‐tier scale were associated with increased risk of reporting at least one negative effect in a logistic model ( P < 0.01). The change to a more granular rating system provoked an immediate response in the transplant community that may have long‐term implications for transplant hospital finances and patient options for transplantation.