Search

Virtually anything can be ranked; the US News and World Report (USNWR or US News) ranks the top 50 hospitals specializing in cardiology, heart, and vascular surgery. Here the authors propose validating the effectiveness of rankings by comparing differences among the USNWR metrics across the top 50 hospitals. Methods The ranking system for the top 50 hospitals specializing in cardiology, heart, and vascular surgery was derived from 16 variant scores. Each hospital's scores were collected from the USNWR. Hospitals were categorized into quintiles consisting of 10 institutions (1-10, 11-20, etc). An analysis of variance/χ² comprehensive statistical analysis was run alongside a Wilcoxon/Kruskal-Wallis test to compare statistical outcomes. A significant threshold was deemed to be P < 0.05. Results Significant differences were noted between quintiles for advanced technologies (P = 0.05), US News specialty score (P < 0.001), number of patient referrals (P = 0.004), and expert opinion (P < 0.001). Non-statistically significant differences were found among patient experience, public transparency, Society of Thoracic Surgery transparency, American College of Cardiology transparency, recognition as a magnet hospital, and nursing staffing. Interestingly, a large variance was noted in the average number of referrals between the first quintile (13,371) and the last (6690). Conclusions Expert opinion plays a critical role in the reputation of the USNWR's top 10 hospitals in cardiology, heart, and vascular surgery. Although many have argued about the merits of USNWR hospital rankings, taken together, rankings fill a strong customer demand and are sticky. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Medicare insures over 65 million Americans and is a primary driver of private insurance reimbursement rates. However, public data shows Medicare reimbursement for comparatively complex procedures, such as aortic aneurysm repair, is disproportionate. Medicare reimbursement rates are multifactorial and highly localized, yet little is known about nationwide trends. Therefore, we sought to compare Medicare reimbursement for aortic surgery by geographic region and state poverty level., Methods: Fee charged, total payment received, and Medicare payment data for aortic procedures comes from publicly available datasets. Geographic regions were determined using Center for Disease Control designations, and state level poverty statistics were obtained from published Census Bureau data. The mean fee charged, total, and Medicare payments were compared by poverty and geographic subgroup., Results: States with the highest poverty levels received significantly lower Medicare payments when compared to states with lower poverty levels. Medicare and total payments for aortic procedures varied significantly by geographic region, with Midwest and Southern states receiving lower Medicare and total payments relative to the Northeast and West. Further geographic division revealed lower Medicare payments to North Central, East South-Central, and West South-Central states with correspondingly lower total payments. Total payments were highest in the Pacific West., Conclusion: Aortic procedures are disproportionately reimbursed from Medicare. Our results suggest that states with the highest poverty levels were paid strikingly less than other regions for complex aortic procedures. Payments also varied regionally, with Midwestern and Southern providers receiving lower reimbursement than their Northeastern and Western counterparts., (Copyright © 2025 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)