MERCY MEDICAL CENTER

Acute Care Hospitals Roseburg, OR Emergency Services
4/5
Overall Rating
4/5
Hospital Type
Acute Care Hospitals
Ownership
Government - Hospital District or Authority
Emergency
Yes

Hospital Information

Facility NameMERCY MEDICAL CENTER
Address2700 NW STEWART PARKWAY
Roseburg, OR 97471
CountyDOUGLAS
Hospital TypeAcute Care Hospitals
OwnershipGovernment - Hospital District or Authority
Emergency ServicesYes
Phone(541) 673-0611

Quality Measures & Clinical Outcomes

Other Measures

Measure Score vs. National
Emergency department volume 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 668 patients 4.3 No Different Than the National Rate
Safe Use of Opioids - Concurrent Prescribing Based on 1,611 patients 9
Severe Sepsis 3-Hour Bundle Based on 96 patients 2 79
Severe Sepsis 6-Hour Bundle Based on 50 patients 2 94

Complications

Measure Score vs. National
Rate of complications for hip/knee replacement patients 1 Not Available Number of Cases Too Small

Healthcare-Associated Infections

Measure Score vs. National
Central Line Associated Bloodstream Infection (ICU + select Wards): Lower Confidence Limit 8 N/A No Different than National Benchmark
Central Line Associated Bloodstream Infection (ICU + select Wards): Upper Confidence Limit 1.625 No Different than National Benchmark
Central Line Associated Bloodstream Infection: Number of Device Days 2034 No Different than National Benchmark
Central Line Associated Bloodstream Infection (ICU + select Wards): Predicted Cases 1.843 No Different than National Benchmark
Central Line Associated Bloodstream Infection (ICU + select Wards): Observed Cases 0 No Different than National Benchmark
Central Line Associated Bloodstream Infection (ICU + select Wards) 0.000 No Different than National Benchmark
Catheter Associated Urinary Tract Infections (ICU + select Wards): Lower Confidence Limit 0.191 No Different than National Benchmark
Catheter Associated Urinary Tract Infections (ICU + select Wards): Upper Confidence Limit 2.043 No Different than National Benchmark
Catheter Associated Urinary Tract Infections (ICU + select Wards): Number of Urinary Catheter Days 3826 No Different than National Benchmark
Catheter Associated Urinary Tract Infections (ICU + select Wards): Predicted Cases 3.997 No Different than National Benchmark
Catheter Associated Urinary Tract Infections (ICU + select Wards): Observed Cases 3 No Different than National Benchmark
Catheter Associated Urinary Tract Infections (ICU + select Wards) 0.751 No Different than National Benchmark
SSI - Colon Surgery: Lower Confidence Limit 8 N/A No Different than National Benchmark
SSI - Colon Surgery: Upper Confidence Limit 1.783 No Different than National Benchmark
SSI - Colon Surgery: Number of Procedures 66 No Different than National Benchmark
SSI - Colon Surgery: Predicted Cases 1.680 No Different than National Benchmark
SSI - Colon Surgery: Observed Cases 0 No Different than National Benchmark
SSI - Colon Surgery 0.000 No Different than National Benchmark
SSI - Abdominal Hysterectomy: Lower Confidence Limit 0.332 No Different than National Benchmark
SSI - Abdominal Hysterectomy: Upper Confidence Limit 6.542 No Different than National Benchmark
SSI - Abdominal Hysterectomy: Number of Procedures 120 No Different than National Benchmark
SSI - Abdominal Hysterectomy: Predicted Cases 1.010 No Different than National Benchmark
SSI - Abdominal Hysterectomy: Observed Cases 2 No Different than National Benchmark
SSI - Abdominal Hysterectomy 1.980 No Different than National Benchmark
MRSA Bacteremia: Lower Confidence Limit 8 N/A No Different than National Benchmark
MRSA Bacteremia: Upper Confidence Limit 1.888 No Different than National Benchmark
MRSA Bacteremia: Patient Days 33831 No Different than National Benchmark
MRSA Bacteremia: Predicted Cases 1.587 No Different than National Benchmark
MRSA Bacteremia: Observed Cases 0 No Different than National Benchmark
MRSA Bacteremia 0.000 No Different than National Benchmark
Clostridium Difficile (C.Diff): Lower Confidence Limit 0.100 Better than the National Benchmark
Clostridium Difficile (C.Diff): Upper Confidence Limit 0.757 Better than the National Benchmark
Clostridium Difficile (C.Diff): Patient Days 32660 Better than the National Benchmark
Clostridium Difficile (C.Diff): Predicted Cases 12.750 Better than the National Benchmark
Clostridium Difficile (C.Diff): Observed Cases 4 Better than the National Benchmark
Clostridium Difficile (C.Diff) 0.314 Better than the National Benchmark

Immunization

Measure Score vs. National
Healthcare workers given influenza vaccination Based on 1,910 patients 62

Mortality

Measure Score vs. National
Death rate for heart attack patients Based on 153 patients 13.5 No Different Than the National Rate
Death rate for CABG surgery patients 5 Not Available Not Available
Death rate for COPD patients Based on 88 patients 11.9 No Different Than the National Rate
Death rate for heart failure patients Based on 251 patients 14.1 No Different Than the National Rate
Death rate for pneumonia patients Based on 224 patients 17.3 No Different Than the National Rate
Death rate for stroke patients Based on 104 patients 22.1 Worse 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 399 patients 178
Average (median) time patients spent in the emergency department before leaving from the visit A lower number of minutes is better Based on 370 patients 174
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 18 patients 224
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 212
Left before being seen Based on 41,097 patients 3
Head CT results Based on 34 patients 85
Endoscopy/polyp surveillance: appropriate follow-up interval for normal colonoscopy in average risk patients Based on 79 patients 100
Improvement in Patient's Visual Function within 90 Days Following Cataract Surgery 5 Not Available
ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction (STEMI) 1 Not Available

Patient Safety

Measure Score vs. National
Pressure ulcer rate Based on 2,236 patients 0.31 No Different Than the National Rate
Death rate among surgical inpatients with serious treatable complications 1 Not Available Number of Cases Too Small
Iatrogenic pneumothorax rate Based on 2,762 patients 0.18 No Different Than the National Rate
In-hospital fall-associated fracture rate Based on 2,684 patients 0.25 No Different Than the National Rate
Postoperative hemorrhage or hematoma rate Based on 423 patients 2.18 No Different Than the National Rate
Postoperative acute kidney injury requiring dialysis rate Based on 54 patients 1.66 No Different Than the National Rate
Postoperative respiratory failure rate Based on 56 patients 10.97 No Different Than the National Rate
Perioperative pulmonary embolism or deep vein thrombosis rate Based on 450 patients 2.88 No Different Than the National Rate
Postoperative sepsis rate Based on 45 patients 5.04 No Different Than the National Rate
Postoperative wound dehiscence rate Based on 104 patients 1.70 No Different Than the National Rate
Abdominopelvic accidental puncture or laceration rate Based on 350 patients 0.99 No Different Than the National Rate
CMS Medicare PSI 90: Patient safety and adverse events composite 0.90 No Different Than the National Value

Sepsis Care

Measure Score vs. National
Appropriate care for severe sepsis and septic shock Based on 96 patients 2 73
Septic Shock 3-Hour Bundle Based on 22 patients 2 91
Septic Shock 6-Hour Bundle Based on 13 patients 2 92

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 160 patients 95

Venous Thromboembolism

Measure Score vs. National
Venous Thromboembolism Prophylaxis Based on 4,187 patients 90
Intensive Care Unit Venous Thromboembolism Prophylaxis Based on 655 patients 98

Patient Experience (HCAHPS Survey)

Based on 723 completed surveys. Response rate: 20%.

Patients who reported that their nurses "Always" communicated well

Response: 78% Score: Not Applicable

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

Response: 3% 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: 92

Nurse communication - star rating

Response: Not Applicable% Score: Not Applicable

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

Response: 87% Score: Not Applicable

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

Response: 1% Score: Not Applicable

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

Response: 12% 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: 4% Score: Not Applicable

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

Response: 23% Score: Not Applicable

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

Response: 74% Score: Not Applicable

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

Response: 4% Score: Not Applicable

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

Response: 22% Score: Not Applicable

Patients who reported that their doctors "Always" communicated well

Response: 77% Score: Not Applicable

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

Response: 5% Score: Not Applicable

Patients who reported that their doctors "Usually" communicated well

Response: 18% Score: Not Applicable

Doctor communication - linear mean score

Response: Not Applicable% Score: 90

Doctor communication - star rating

Response: Not Applicable% Score: Not Applicable

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

Response: 84% Score: Not Applicable

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

Response: 3% Score: Not Applicable

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

Response: 13% Score: Not Applicable

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

Response: 76% Score: Not Applicable

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

Response: 5% 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: 72% Score: Not Applicable

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

Response: 6% Score: Not Applicable

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

Response: 22% Score: Not Applicable

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

Response: 58% Score: Not Applicable

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

Response: 21% Score: Not Applicable

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

Response: 21% Score: Not Applicable

Communication about medicines - linear mean score

Response: Not Applicable% Score: 75

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: 72% Score: Not Applicable

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

Response: 10% Score: Not Applicable

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

Response: 18% Score: Not Applicable

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

Response: 44% Score: Not Applicable

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

Response: 32% Score: Not Applicable

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

Response: 24% Score: Not Applicable

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

Response: 14% Score: Not Applicable

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

Response: 86% Score: Not Applicable

Discharge information - linear mean score

Response: Not Applicable% Score: 86

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: 15% Score: Not Applicable

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

Response: 85% Score: Not Applicable

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

Response: 12% Score: Not Applicable

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

Response: 88% Score: Not Applicable

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

Response: 67% 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: 22% Score: Not Applicable

Cleanliness - linear mean score

Response: Not Applicable% Score: 84

Cleanliness - star rating

Response: Not Applicable% Score: Not Applicable

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

Response: 51% Score: Not Applicable

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

Response: 12% Score: Not Applicable

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

Response: 37% Score: Not Applicable

Quietness - linear mean score

Response: Not Applicable% Score: 79

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: 11% Score: Not Applicable

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

Response: 24% Score: Not Applicable

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

Response: 65% Score: Not Applicable

Overall hospital rating - linear mean score

Response: Not Applicable% Score: 86

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: 6% Score: Not Applicable

Patients who reported YES, they would definitely recommend the hospital

Response: 58% Score: Not Applicable

Patients who reported YES, they would probably recommend the hospital

Response: 36% Score: Not Applicable

Recommend hospital - linear mean score

Response: Not Applicable% Score: 83

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 Government - Hospital District or Authority
  • Rating 4/5
  • 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 MERCY MEDICAL CENTER

MERCY MEDICAL CENTER is a acute care hospitals located in Roseburg, Oregon. The facility is government - hospital district or authority owned and provides emergency services. It has an overall quality rating of 4 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 723 surveys available for review.