The Imperfect Science of Publicly Reported Hospital Rating Systems: Lessons From Credit Rating Agencies

Abstract

The number of publicly available hospital quality rating systems has substantially increased over the past 2 decades. These rating systems are meant to provide patients, clinicians, and payers with relevant information to select and pay differentially for better quality of care. However, there is evidence of inconsistency, unreliability, and bias in current hospital quality rating systems. Financial ratings are similarly intended to enable investors to identify stronger companies (as investment targets), and these rating systems could provide insight into strategies to improve hospital quality ratings. We evaluate the credit rating methodologies of Standard & Poor's, Moody's, and Fitch Group and propose principles to improve hospital quality rating systems through better standardized measures and the use of external audits of source data. Emulating key features of credit rating systems may advance the delivery of meaningful hospital quality ratings.