GOOD SAMARITAN HOSPITAL

Acute Care Hospitals San Jose, CA Emergency Services
2/5
Overall Rating
2/5
Hospital Type
Acute Care Hospitals
Ownership
Proprietary
Emergency
Yes

Hospital Information

Facility NameGOOD SAMARITAN HOSPITAL
Address2425 SAMARITAN DRIVE
San Jose, CA 95124
CountySANTA CLARA
Hospital TypeAcute Care Hospitals
OwnershipProprietary
Emergency ServicesYes
Phone(408) 559-2011

Quality Measures & Clinical Outcomes

Other Measures

Measure Score vs. National
Emergency department volume very high
Global Malnutrition Composite Score 5 Not Available
Global Malnutrition Composite Score: Malnutrition Diagnosis Documented 5 Not Available
Global Malnutrition Composite Score: Malnutrition Risk Screening 5 Not Available
Global Malnutrition Composite Score: Nutrition Assessment 5 Not Available
Global Malnutrition Composite Score: Nutritional Care Plan 5 Not Available
Hospital Harm - Severe Hyperglycemia 5 Not Available
Hospital Harm - Severe Hypoglycemia 5 Not Available
Hospital Harm - Opioid Related Adverse Events 5 Not Available
Hybrid Hospital-Wide All-Cause Risk Standardized Mortality Rate Based on 2,140 patients 3.7 No Different Than the National Rate
Safe Use of Opioids - Concurrent Prescribing Based on 3,955 patients 14
Severe Sepsis 3-Hour Bundle Based on 151 patients 2 86
Severe Sepsis 6-Hour Bundle Based on 93 patients 2 96

Complications

Measure Score vs. National
Rate of complications for hip/knee replacement patients Based on 165 patients 3.5 No Different Than the National Rate

Healthcare-Associated Infections

Measure Score vs. National
Central Line Associated Bloodstream Infection (ICU + select Wards): Lower Confidence Limit 0.166 No Different than National Benchmark
Central Line Associated Bloodstream Infection (ICU + select Wards): Upper Confidence Limit 1.263 No Different than National Benchmark
Central Line Associated Bloodstream Infection: Number of Device Days 8860 No Different than National Benchmark
Central Line Associated Bloodstream Infection (ICU + select Wards): Predicted Cases 7.641 No Different than National Benchmark
Central Line Associated Bloodstream Infection (ICU + select Wards): Observed Cases 4 No Different than National Benchmark
Central Line Associated Bloodstream Infection (ICU + select Wards) 0.523 No Different than National Benchmark
Catheter Associated Urinary Tract Infections (ICU + select Wards): Lower Confidence Limit 0.592 No Different than National Benchmark
Catheter Associated Urinary Tract Infections (ICU + select Wards): Upper Confidence Limit 2.228 No Different than National Benchmark
Catheter Associated Urinary Tract Infections (ICU + select Wards): Number of Urinary Catheter Days 8022 No Different than National Benchmark
Catheter Associated Urinary Tract Infections (ICU + select Wards): Predicted Cases 7.414 No Different than National Benchmark
Catheter Associated Urinary Tract Infections (ICU + select Wards): Observed Cases 9 No Different than National Benchmark
Catheter Associated Urinary Tract Infections (ICU + select Wards) 1.214 No Different than National Benchmark
SSI - Colon Surgery: Lower Confidence Limit 1.136 Worse than the National Benchmark
SSI - Colon Surgery: Upper Confidence Limit 3.988 Worse than the National Benchmark
SSI - Colon Surgery: Number of Procedures 188 Worse than the National Benchmark
SSI - Colon Surgery: Predicted Cases 4.470 Worse than the National Benchmark
SSI - Colon Surgery: Observed Cases 10 Worse than the National Benchmark
SSI - Colon Surgery 2.237 Worse than the National Benchmark
SSI - Abdominal Hysterectomy: Lower Confidence Limit 13 Not Available Not Available
SSI - Abdominal Hysterectomy: Upper Confidence Limit 13 Not Available Not Available
SSI - Abdominal Hysterectomy: Number of Procedures 107 Not Available
SSI - Abdominal Hysterectomy: Predicted Cases 0.890 Not Available
SSI - Abdominal Hysterectomy: Observed Cases 1 Not Available
SSI - Abdominal Hysterectomy 13 Not Available Not Available
MRSA Bacteremia: Lower Confidence Limit 0.069 No Different than National Benchmark
MRSA Bacteremia: Upper Confidence Limit 1.360 No Different than National Benchmark
MRSA Bacteremia: Patient Days 81172 No Different than National Benchmark
MRSA Bacteremia: Predicted Cases 4.858 No Different than National Benchmark
MRSA Bacteremia: Observed Cases 2 No Different than National Benchmark
MRSA Bacteremia 0.412 No Different than National Benchmark
Clostridium Difficile (C.Diff): Lower Confidence Limit 0.140 Better than the National Benchmark
Clostridium Difficile (C.Diff): Upper Confidence Limit 0.492 Better than the National Benchmark
Clostridium Difficile (C.Diff): Patient Days 74768 Better than the National Benchmark
Clostridium Difficile (C.Diff): Predicted Cases 36.246 Better than the National Benchmark
Clostridium Difficile (C.Diff): Observed Cases 10 Better than the National Benchmark
Clostridium Difficile (C.Diff) 0.276 Better than the National Benchmark

Immunization

Measure Score vs. National
Healthcare workers given influenza vaccination Based on 3,057 patients 51

Mortality

Measure Score vs. National
Death rate for heart attack patients Based on 244 patients 12.2 No Different Than the National Rate
Death rate for CABG surgery patients Based on 47 patients 1.8 No Different Than the National Rate
Death rate for COPD patients Based on 104 patients 7.3 No Different Than the National Rate
Death rate for heart failure patients Based on 552 patients 11.8 No Different Than the National Rate
Death rate for pneumonia patients Based on 679 patients 17.4 No Different Than the National Rate
Death rate for stroke patients Based on 396 patients 11.9 No Different Than the National Rate

Outpatient Procedures

Measure Score vs. National
Average (median) time all patients spent in the emergency department before leaving from the visit, including psychiatric/mental health patients and patients who were transferred to another facility. A lower number of minutes is better Based on 437 patients 131
Average (median) time patients spent in the emergency department before leaving from the visit A lower number of minutes is better Based on 415 patients 128
Average (median) time patients spent in the emergency department before leaving from the visit- Psychiatric/Mental Health Patients. A lower number of minutes is better Based on 12 patients 322
Average (median) time transfer patients spent in the emergency department before leaving from the visit. A lower number of minutes is better Based on 11 patients 294
Left before being seen Based on 67,617 patients 0
Head CT results 1 Not Available
Endoscopy/polyp surveillance: appropriate follow-up interval for normal colonoscopy in average risk patients Based on 22 patients 95
Improvement in Patient's Visual Function within 90 Days Following Cataract Surgery 5 Not Available
ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction (STEMI) Based on 28 patients 46

Patient Safety

Measure Score vs. National
Pressure ulcer rate Based on 7,373 patients 0.27 No Different Than the National Rate
Death rate among surgical inpatients with serious treatable complications Based on 98 patients 143.59 No Different Than the National Rate
Iatrogenic pneumothorax rate Based on 8,866 patients 0.12 No Different Than the National Rate
In-hospital fall-associated fracture rate Based on 9,051 patients 0.20 No Different Than the National Rate
Postoperative hemorrhage or hematoma rate Based on 1,836 patients 2.33 No Different Than the National Rate
Postoperative acute kidney injury requiring dialysis rate Based on 670 patients 1.80 No Different Than the National Rate
Postoperative respiratory failure rate Based on 669 patients 6.73 No Different Than the National Rate
Perioperative pulmonary embolism or deep vein thrombosis rate Based on 1,929 patients 2.65 No Different Than the National Rate
Postoperative sepsis rate Based on 654 patients 7.58 No Different Than the National Rate
Postoperative wound dehiscence rate Based on 496 patients 1.59 No Different Than the National Rate
Abdominopelvic accidental puncture or laceration rate Based on 1,340 patients 0.75 No Different Than the National Rate
CMS Medicare PSI 90: Patient safety and adverse events composite 0.84 No Different Than the National Value

Sepsis Care

Measure Score vs. National
Appropriate care for severe sepsis and septic shock Based on 151 patients 2 70
Septic Shock 3-Hour Bundle Based on 42 patients 2 69
Septic Shock 6-Hour Bundle Based on 24 patients 2 83

Stroke Care

Measure Score vs. National
Discharged on Antithrombotic Therapy 5 Not Available
Anticoagulation Therapy for Atrial Fibrillation/Flutter 5 Not Available
Antithrombotic Therapy by End of Hospital Day 2 Based on 305 patients 87

Venous Thromboembolism

Measure Score vs. National
Venous Thromboembolism Prophylaxis Based on 7,458 patients 94
Intensive Care Unit Venous Thromboembolism Prophylaxis Based on 2,102 patients 100

Patient Experience (HCAHPS Survey)

Based on 581 completed surveys. Response rate: 21%.

Patients who reported that their nurses "Always" communicated well

Response: 75% Score: Not Applicable

Patients who reported that their nurses "Sometimes" or "Never" communicated well

Response: 6% Score: Not Applicable

Patients who reported that their nurses "Usually" communicated well

Response: 19% Score: Not Applicable

Nurse communication - linear mean score

Response: Not Applicable% Score: 89

Nurse communication - star rating

Response: Not Applicable% Score: Not Applicable

Patients who reported that their nurses "Always" treated them with courtesy and respect

Response: 82% Score: Not Applicable

Patients who reported that their nurses "Sometimes" or "Never" treated them with courtesy and respect

Response: 5% Score: Not Applicable

Patients who reported that their nurses "Usually" treated them with courtesy and respect

Response: 13% Score: Not Applicable

Patients who reported that their nurses "Always" listened carefully to them

Response: 73% Score: Not Applicable

Patients who reported that their nurses "Sometimes" or "Never" listened carefully to them

Response: 6% Score: Not Applicable

Patients who reported that their nurses "Usually" listened carefully to them

Response: 21% Score: Not Applicable

Patients who reported that their nurses "Always" explained things in a way they could understand

Response: 69% Score: Not Applicable

Patients who reported that their nurses "Sometimes" or "Never" explained things in a way they could understand

Response: 7% Score: Not Applicable

Patients who reported that their nurses "Usually" explained things in a way they could understand

Response: 24% Score: Not Applicable

Patients who reported that their doctors "Always" communicated well

Response: 71% Score: Not Applicable

Patients who reported that their doctors "Sometimes" or "Never" communicated well

Response: 10% Score: Not Applicable

Patients who reported that their doctors "Usually" communicated well

Response: 19% Score: Not Applicable

Doctor communication - linear mean score

Response: Not Applicable% Score: 87

Doctor communication - star rating

Response: Not Applicable% Score: Not Applicable

Patients who reported that their doctors "Always" treated them with courtesy and respect

Response: 77% Score: Not Applicable

Patients who reported that their doctors "Sometimes" or "Never" treated them with courtesy and respect

Response: 7% Score: Not Applicable

Patients who reported that their doctors "Usually" treated them with courtesy and respect

Response: 16% Score: Not Applicable

Patients who reported that their doctors "Always" listened carefully to them

Response: 70% Score: Not Applicable

Patients who reported that their doctors "Sometimes" or "Never" listened carefully to them

Response: 11% Score: Not Applicable

Patients who reported that their doctors "Usually" listened carefully to them

Response: 19% Score: Not Applicable

Patients who reported that their doctors "Always" explained things in a way they could understand

Response: 66% Score: Not Applicable

Patients who reported that their doctors "Sometimes" or "Never" explained things in a way they could understand

Response: 11% Score: Not Applicable

Patients who reported that their doctors "Usually" explained things in a way they could understand

Response: 23% Score: Not Applicable

Patients who reported that staff "Always" explained about medicines before giving it to them

Response: 52% Score: Not Applicable

Patients who reported that staff "Sometimes" or "Never" explained about medicines before giving it to them

Response: 28% Score: Not Applicable

Patients who reported that staff "Usually" explained about medicines before giving it to them

Response: 20% Score: Not Applicable

Communication about medicines - linear mean score

Response: Not Applicable% Score: 70

Communication about medicines - star rating

Response: Not Applicable% Score: Not Applicable

Patients who reported that when receiving new medication the staff "Always" communicated what the medication was for

Response: 67% Score: Not Applicable

Patients who reported that when receiving new medication the staff "Sometimes" or "Never" communicated what the medication was for

Response: 14% Score: Not Applicable

Patients who reported that when receiving new medication the staff "Usually" communicated what the medication was for.

Response: 19% Score: Not Applicable

Patients who reported that when receiving new medication the staff "Always" discussed possible side effects

Response: 36% Score: Not Applicable

Patients who reported that when receiving new medication the staff "Sometimes" or "Never" discussed possible side effects

Response: 42% Score: Not Applicable

Patients who reported that when receiving new medication the staff "Usually" discussed possible side effects

Response: 22% Score: Not Applicable

Patients who reported that NO, they were not given information about what to do during their recovery at home

Response: 18% Score: Not Applicable

Patients who reported that YES, they were given information about what to do during their recovery at home

Response: 82% Score: Not Applicable

Discharge information - linear mean score

Response: Not Applicable% Score: 82

Discharge information - star rating

Response: Not Applicable% Score: Not Applicable

Patients who reported that NO, they did not discuss whether they would need help after discharge

Response: 20% Score: Not Applicable

Patients who reported that YES, they did discuss whether they would need help after discharge

Response: 80% Score: Not Applicable

Patients who reported that NO, they did not receive written information about possible symptoms to look out for after discharge

Response: 16% Score: Not Applicable

Patients who reported that YES, they did receive written information about possible symptoms to look out for after discharge

Response: 84% Score: Not Applicable

Patients who reported that their room and bathroom were "Always" clean

Response: 68% Score: Not Applicable

Patients who reported that their room and bathroom were "Sometimes" or "Never" clean

Response: 11% Score: Not Applicable

Patients who reported that their room and bathroom were "Usually" clean

Response: 21% Score: Not Applicable

Cleanliness - linear mean score

Response: Not Applicable% Score: 85

Cleanliness - star rating

Response: Not Applicable% Score: Not Applicable

Patients who reported that the area around their room was "Always" quiet at night

Response: 38% Score: Not Applicable

Patients who reported that the area around their room was "Sometimes" or "Never" quiet at night

Response: 26% Score: Not Applicable

Patients who reported that the area around their room was "Usually" quiet at night

Response: 36% Score: Not Applicable

Quietness - linear mean score

Response: Not Applicable% Score: 68

Quietness - star rating

Response: Not Applicable% Score: Not Applicable

Patients who gave their hospital a rating of 6 or lower on a scale from 0 (lowest) to 10 (highest)

Response: 14% Score: Not Applicable

Patients who gave their hospital a rating of 7 or 8 on a scale from 0 (lowest) to 10 (highest)

Response: 25% Score: Not Applicable

Patients who gave their hospital a rating of 9 or 10 on a scale from 0 (lowest) to 10 (highest)

Response: 61% Score: Not Applicable

Overall hospital rating - linear mean score

Response: Not Applicable% Score: 84

Overall hospital rating - star rating

Response: Not Applicable% Score: Not Applicable

Patients who reported NO, they would probably not or definitely not recommend the hospital

Response: 9% Score: Not Applicable

Patients who reported YES, they would definitely recommend the hospital

Response: 64% Score: Not Applicable

Patients who reported YES, they would probably recommend the hospital

Response: 27% Score: Not Applicable

Recommend hospital - linear mean score

Response: Not Applicable% Score: 84

Recommend hospital - star rating

Response: Not Applicable% Score: Not Applicable

Summary star rating

Response: Not Applicable% Score: Not Applicable

Quick Facts

  • Type Acute Care Hospitals
  • Ownership Proprietary
  • Rating 2/5
  • Emergency Yes
  • Measures 88 recorded

Data Source

Hospital data from CMS Hospital Compare. Quality measures and patient experience surveys are updated periodically by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services.

About GOOD SAMARITAN HOSPITAL

GOOD SAMARITAN HOSPITAL is a acute care hospitals located in San Jose, California. The facility is proprietary owned and provides emergency services. It has an overall quality rating of 2 out of 5 stars from CMS. This hospital has 88 quality measures on record, covering areas such as mortality, readmission rates, complications, and patient safety. Patient experience is measured through the HCAHPS survey, with 581 surveys available for review.