2012 National Healthcare Quality Report

Text Descriptions for Highlights Figures

Figure H.1. Number and proportion of all quality measures for which members of selected groups experienced better, same, or worse quality of care compared with reference group

Quality of CareBlack vs. White (n=191)Asian vs. White (n=165)AI/AN vs. White (n=111)Hispanic vs. NHW (n=178)Poor vs. High Income (n=106)Low vs. High Income (n=106)Middle vs. High Income (n=106)
Better28431237562
Same81806266373849
Worse82423775646255

Key: AI/AN = American Indian or Alaska Native; NHW = non-Hispanic White; n = number of measures.
Better = Population received better quality of care than reference group.
Same = Population and reference group received about the same quality of care.
Worse = Population received worse quality of care than reference group.

Return to Document

Figure H.2. Number and proportion of all access measures for which members of selected groups experienced better, same, or worse access to care compared with reference group

Access to CareBlack vs. White (n=21)Asian vs. White (n=19)AI/AN vs. White (n=14)Hispanic vs. NHW (n=21)Poor vs. High Income (n=21)Low vs. High Income (n=21)Middle vs. High Income (n=21)
Better34NA3NANANA
Same111183NA36
Worse74615211815

Key: AI/AN = American Indian or Alaska Native; NHW = non-Hispanic White; n = number of measures.
Better = Population had better access to care than reference group.
Same = Population and reference group had about the same access to care.
Worse = Population had worse access to care than reference group.

Return to Document

Figure H.3. Average performance across a panel of quality of care process measures and access to care measures

Measure20022003200420052006200720082009
Did Not Receive Indicated Process of CareNANANA33.631.730.630.730.1
Encountered Access Problem Seeking Care24.124.224.324.725.225.225.426.3

Return to Document

Figure H.4. Number and proportion of all quality measures that are improving, not changing, or worsening, overall and for select populations

PopulationWorseningNo ChangeImproving
Total (n=152)165185
Black (n=154)145882
Asian (n=129)65469
AIAN (n=80)53738
Hispanic (n=153)106776
Poor (n=87)93642
Low Income (n=87)103740
Middle Income (n=86)123836

Key:AI/AN = American Indian or Alaska Native; n = number of measures.
Improving = Quality is going in a positive direction at an average annual rate greater than 1% per year.
No Change = Quality is not changing or is changing at an average annual rate less than 1% per year.
Worsening = Quality is going in a negative direction at an average annual rate greater than 1% per year.

Return to Document

Figure H.5. Number and proportion of all access measures that are improving, not changing, or worsening, overall and for select populations

PopulationWorseningNo ChangeImproving
Total (n=15)771
Black (n=15)3102
Asian (n=13)NA13NA
AI/AN (n=10)37NA
Hispanic (n=15)2112
Poor (n=15)483
Low Income (n=15)4101
Middle Income (n=15)852

Key:AI/AN = American Indian or Alaska Native; n = number of measures.
Improving = Access is going in a positive direction at an average annual rate greater than 1% per year.
No Change = Access is not changing or is changing at an average annual rate less than 1% per year.
Worsening = Access is going in a negative direction at an average annual rate greater than 1% per year.

Return to Document

Figure H.6. Number and proportion of all quality measures for which disparities related to race, ethnicity, and income are improving, not changing, or worsening

ChangeBlack vs. White (n=154)Asian vs. White (n=129)AI/AN vs. White (n=80)Hispanic vs. NHW (n=148)Poor vs. High Income (n=85)Low vs. High Income (n=85)Middle vs. High Income (n=85)
Worsening5856411
No Change13711273134788083
Improving12928341

Key: AI/AN = American Indian or Alaska Native; NHW = non-Hispanic White; n = number of measures.
Improving = Disparity is getting smaller at a rate greater than 1% per year.
No Change = Disparity is not changing or is changing at a rate less than 1% per year.
Worsening = Disparity is getting larger at a rate greater than 1% per year.

Return to Document

Figure H.7. Number and proportion of all access measures for which disparities related to race, ethnicity, and income are improving, not changing, or worsening

ChangeBlack vs. White (n=15)Asian vs. White (n=13)AI/AN vs. White (n=10)Hispanic vs. NHW (n=15)Poor vs. High Income (n=15)Low vs. High Income (n=15)Middle vs. High Income (n=15)
WorseningNANA1111NA
No Change1512914141415
ImprovingNA1NANANANANA

Key: AI/AN = American Indian or Alaska Native; NHW = non-Hispanic White; n = number of measures.
Improving = Disparity is getting smaller at a rate greater than 1% per year.
No Change = Disparity is not changing or is changing at a rate less than 1% per year.
Worsening = Disparity is getting larger at a rate greater than 1% per year.

Return to Document

Figure H.8. Percentage of quality measures in the 2006, 2011, and 2012 reports for which a reliable estimate could not be generated

ReportsAsianNHOPIAI/ANHispanicPoor
2006 Reports3393471260
2011 Reports198542746
2012 Reports148242745

Key: NHOPI = Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander; AI/AN = American Indian or Alaska Native.

Return to Document

Figure H.9. Number and proportion of measures that are improving, not changing, or worsening, by type of quality measure

MeasuresWorseningNo ChangeImproving
Process Measures (n=67)62536
Outcome Measures (n=64)102331
Preventive Care (n=37)31717
Acute Treatment (n=25)NA421
Chronic Disease Management (n=46)81919

Key:n = number of measures.
Improving = Quality is going in a positive direction at an average annual rate greater than 1% per year.
No Change = Quality is not changing or is changing at an average annual rate less than 1% per year.
Worsening = Quality is going in a negative direction at an average annual rate greater than 1% per year.
Note: Preventive care includes screening, counseling, and vaccinations; acute treatment includes hospital
care for cancer, heart attack, and pneumonia; chronic disease management includes ambulatory care
for diabetes, arthritis, and asthma and nursing home care for pressure sores and pain.

Return to Document

Figure H.10a. Overall quality of care, preventive care, acute care, and chronic care, by State

Overall quality of care
Lowest quality quartileSecond quartileThird quartileHighest quality quartile
AlaskaCaliforniaHawaiiUtah
NevadaOregonWashingtonNorth Dakota
New MexicoArizonaIdahoSouth Dakota
TexasWyomingMontanaMinnesota
OklahomaFloridaColoradoWisconsin
LouisianaAlabamaNebraskaIowa
ArkansasGeorgiaKansasMaine
MississippiIllinoisMissouriNew Hampshire
KentuckyTennesseeMichiganVermont
IndianaOhioPennsylvaniaMassachusetts
West VirginiaNorth CarolinaRhode IslandConnecticut
MarylandNew YorkVirginiaNew Jersey
NANASouth CarolinaDelaware

Source: 2011 State Snapshots.
Note: States are divided into quartiles based on overall health care score.

Figure H.10b. Overall quality of care, preventive care, acute care, and chronic care, by State (continued)

Quality of preventive care
Lowest quality quartileSecond quartileThird quartileHighest quality quartile
OregonAlaskaHawaiiNorth Dakota
NevadaCaliforniaWashingtonSouth Dakota
IdahoUtahArizonaMinnesota
New MexicoColoradoNebraskaIowa
TexasWyomingLouisianaWisconsin
ArkansasMontanaMichiganGeorgia
MissouriKansasRhode IslandMaine
IllinoisOklahomaNew JerseyNew Hampshire
IndianaKentuckyMarylandVermont
OhioTennesseeVirginiaMassachusetts
PennsylvaniaMississippiNorth CarolinaConnecticut
AlabamaFloridaSouth CarolinaNew York
NAWest VirginiaNADelaware

Source: 2011 State Snapshots.
Note: States are divided into quartiles based on overall health care score.

Figure H.10c. Overall quality of care, preventive care, acute care, and chronic care, by State (continued)

Quality of acute care
Lowest quality quartileSecond quartileThird quartileHighest quality quartile
AlaskaNevadaWashingtonIdaho
CaliforniaMontanaOregonUtah
WyomingArizonaColoradoMinnesota
New MexicoNorth DakotaSouth DakotaWisconsin
OklahomaKansasNebraskaMichigan
ArkansasTexasIowaOhio
LouisianaIllinoisMissouriMaine
AlabamaKentuckyIndianaNew Hampshire
GeorgiaMississippiTennesseeMassachusetts
West VirginiaMarylandSouth CarolinaNew Jersey
Rhode IslandDelawarePennsylvaniaVirginia
NANew YorkConnecticutNorth Carolina
NAHawaiiVermontFlorida

Source: 2011 State Snapshots.
Note: States are divided into quartiles based on overall health care score.

Figure H.10d. Overall quality of care, preventive care, acute care, and chronic care, by State (continued)

Quality of chronic care
Lowest quality quartileSecond quartileThird quartileHighest quality quartile
New MexicoWashingtonCaliforniaUtah
TexasOregonMontanaNorth Dakota
OklahomaAlaskaColoradoSouth Dakota
LouisianaIdahoArizonaKansas
IndianaNevadaNebraskaMinnesota
OhioWyomingMissouriIowa
KentuckyArkansasMaineWisconsin
TennesseeIllinoisVermontAlabama
FloridaMississippiConnecticutNew Hampshire
North CarolinaMichiganRhode IslandMassachusetts
West VirginiaGeorgiaNew JerseyDelaware
New YorkSouth CarolinaPennsylvaniaHawaii
NAMarylandVirginiaNA

Source: 2011 State Snapshots.
Note: States are divided into quartiles based on overall health care score.

Return to Document

Current as of May 2013
Internet Citation: 2012 National Healthcare Quality Report: Text Descriptions for Highlights Figures . May 2013. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, Rockville, MD. http://www.ahrq.gov/research/findings/nhqrdr/nhqr12/highlights-text.html