Skip to main content
. 2012 Apr;15(4):438–446. doi: 10.1089/jpm.2011.0345

Table 5.

Stability in Identifying Outliers

Part I: Stability in identifying high-quality outliers All nursing homesa Nursing homes with more than average decedentsb
I. POD QM: 2005 versus 2006c
a) Highest-quality decile in 2005 25.6% 32.5%
b) Highest-quality quartile in 2005 43.8% 49.5%
II. Hospice QM: 2005 versus 2006
a) Highest-quality decile in 2005 40.1% 49.3%
b) Highest-quality quartile in 2005 61.4% 67.7%
III. POD QM versus Hospice QM for 2006d
a) Highest-quality POD decile 22.9% 23.9%
b) Highest-quality POD quartile 41.0% 42.7%
Part II: Stability in Identifying Low-Quality Outliers    
I. POD QM: 2005 versus 2006
a) Lowest-quality decile in 2005 47.7% 63.9%
b) Lowest-quality quartile in 2005 56.2% 66.7%
II. Hospice QM: 2005 versus 2006
a) Lowest-quality decile in 2005 48.3% 63.1%
b) Lowest-quality quartile in 2005 71.2% 76.2%
III. POD QM versus Hospice QM for 2006
a) Lowest-quality POD decile 37.3% 43.3%
b) Lowest-quality POD quartile 47.4% 52.8%
a

The sample size for the POD QMs included 15,036 nursing homes and for the hospice QM 15,265 nursing homes.

b

The sample size for the POD QMs included 6892 nursing homes and for the hospice QM 6375 nursing homes.

c

Example: Of the 1504 nursing homes in 2005 in the top decile of quality, 25.6% remained in the top decile in 2006.

d

Example: In 2006 1523 nursing homes were at the top decile based on the POD QM; 349 of those (or 22.9%) were also classified into the top decile by the hospice QM.

POD, place of death; QM, quality measure.