ST DAVID'S SOUTH AUSTIN MEDICAL CENTER

Acute Care Hospitals Austin, TX Emergency Services
4/5
Overall Rating
4/5
Hospital Type
Acute Care Hospitals
Ownership
Proprietary
Emergency
Yes

Hospital Information

Facility NameST DAVID'S SOUTH AUSTIN MEDICAL CENTER
Address901 WEST BEN WHITE BLVD
Austin, TX 78704
CountyTRAVIS
Hospital TypeAcute Care Hospitals
OwnershipProprietary
Emergency ServicesYes
Phone(512) 448-7107

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 2,242 patients 4.2 No Different Than the National Rate
Safe Use of Opioids - Concurrent Prescribing Based on 5,053 patients 14
Severe Sepsis 3-Hour Bundle Based on 168 patients 2 89
Severe Sepsis 6-Hour Bundle Based on 103 patients 2 96

Complications

Measure Score vs. National
Rate of complications for hip/knee replacement patients Based on 45 patients 3.9 No Different Than the National Rate

Healthcare-Associated Infections

Measure Score vs. National
Central Line Associated Bloodstream Infection (ICU + select Wards): Lower Confidence Limit 0.744 No Different than National Benchmark
Central Line Associated Bloodstream Infection (ICU + select Wards): Upper Confidence Limit 2.064 No Different than National Benchmark
Central Line Associated Bloodstream Infection: Number of Device Days 10884 No Different than National Benchmark
Central Line Associated Bloodstream Infection (ICU + select Wards): Predicted Cases 11.719 No Different than National Benchmark
Central Line Associated Bloodstream Infection (ICU + select Wards): Observed Cases 15 No Different than National Benchmark
Central Line Associated Bloodstream Infection (ICU + select Wards) 1.280 No Different than National Benchmark
Catheter Associated Urinary Tract Infections (ICU + select Wards): Lower Confidence Limit 0.045 Better than the National Benchmark
Catheter Associated Urinary Tract Infections (ICU + select Wards): Upper Confidence Limit 0.483 Better than the National Benchmark
Catheter Associated Urinary Tract Infections (ICU + select Wards): Number of Urinary Catheter Days 11563 Better than the National Benchmark
Catheter Associated Urinary Tract Infections (ICU + select Wards): Predicted Cases 16.897 Better than the National Benchmark
Catheter Associated Urinary Tract Infections (ICU + select Wards): Observed Cases 3 Better than the National Benchmark
Catheter Associated Urinary Tract Infections (ICU + select Wards) 0.178 Better than the National Benchmark
SSI - Colon Surgery: Lower Confidence Limit 0.333 No Different than National Benchmark
SSI - Colon Surgery: Upper Confidence Limit 1.709 No Different than National Benchmark
SSI - Colon Surgery: Number of Procedures 268 No Different than National Benchmark
SSI - Colon Surgery: Predicted Cases 7.301 No Different than National Benchmark
SSI - Colon Surgery: Observed Cases 6 No Different than National Benchmark
SSI - Colon Surgery 0.822 No Different than 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 63 Not Available
SSI - Abdominal Hysterectomy: Predicted Cases 0.552 Not Available
SSI - Abdominal Hysterectomy: Observed Cases 0 Not Available
SSI - Abdominal Hysterectomy 13 Not Available Not Available
MRSA Bacteremia: Lower Confidence Limit 0.614 No Different than National Benchmark
MRSA Bacteremia: Upper Confidence Limit 2.510 No Different than National Benchmark
MRSA Bacteremia: Patient Days 106892 No Different than National Benchmark
MRSA Bacteremia: Predicted Cases 6.053 No Different than National Benchmark
MRSA Bacteremia: Observed Cases 8 No Different than National Benchmark
MRSA Bacteremia 1.322 No Different than National Benchmark
Clostridium Difficile (C.Diff): Lower Confidence Limit 0.124 Better than the National Benchmark
Clostridium Difficile (C.Diff): Upper Confidence Limit 0.372 Better than the National Benchmark
Clostridium Difficile (C.Diff): Patient Days 101236 Better than the National Benchmark
Clostridium Difficile (C.Diff): Predicted Cases 58.206 Better than the National Benchmark
Clostridium Difficile (C.Diff): Observed Cases 13 Better than the National Benchmark
Clostridium Difficile (C.Diff) 0.223 Better than the National Benchmark

Immunization

Measure Score vs. National
Healthcare workers given influenza vaccination Based on 3,887 patients 50

Mortality

Measure Score vs. National
Death rate for heart attack patients Based on 189 patients 10.4 No Different Than the National Rate
Death rate for CABG surgery patients Based on 97 patients 2.5 No Different Than the National Rate
Death rate for COPD patients Based on 89 patients 9.2 No Different Than the National Rate
Death rate for heart failure patients Based on 492 patients 10.7 No Different Than the National Rate
Death rate for pneumonia patients Based on 559 patients 19.7 Worse Than the National Rate
Death rate for stroke patients Based on 180 patients 10.6 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 450 patients 164
Average (median) time patients spent in the emergency department before leaving from the visit A lower number of minutes is better Based on 416 patients 159
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 23 patients 223
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 293
Left before being seen Based on 93,768 patients 1
Head CT results Based on 22 patients 86
Endoscopy/polyp surveillance: appropriate follow-up interval for normal colonoscopy in average risk patients Based on 63 patients 90
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 0

Patient Safety

Measure Score vs. National
Pressure ulcer rate Based on 6,848 patients 0.55 No Different Than the National Rate
Death rate among surgical inpatients with serious treatable complications Based on 107 patients 169.22 No Different Than the National Rate
Iatrogenic pneumothorax rate Based on 8,597 patients 0.13 No Different Than the National Rate
In-hospital fall-associated fracture rate Based on 8,536 patients 0.27 No Different Than the National Rate
Postoperative hemorrhage or hematoma rate Based on 2,140 patients 1.66 No Different Than the National Rate
Postoperative acute kidney injury requiring dialysis rate Based on 717 patients 1.32 No Different Than the National Rate
Postoperative respiratory failure rate Based on 761 patients 16.03 Worse Than the National Rate
Perioperative pulmonary embolism or deep vein thrombosis rate Based on 2,249 patients 1.96 No Different Than the National Rate
Postoperative sepsis rate Based on 732 patients 3.61 No Different Than the National Rate
Postoperative wound dehiscence rate Based on 434 patients 1.89 No Different Than the National Rate
Abdominopelvic accidental puncture or laceration rate Based on 1,501 patients 0.96 No Different Than the National Rate
CMS Medicare PSI 90: Patient safety and adverse events composite 0.98 No Different Than the National Value

Sepsis Care

Measure Score vs. National
Appropriate care for severe sepsis and septic shock Based on 168 patients 2 83
Septic Shock 3-Hour Bundle Based on 53 patients 2 92
Septic Shock 6-Hour Bundle Based on 41 patients 2 98

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 210 patients 93

Venous Thromboembolism

Measure Score vs. National
Venous Thromboembolism Prophylaxis Based on 11,732 patients 93
Intensive Care Unit Venous Thromboembolism Prophylaxis Based on 1,733 patients 98

Patient Experience (HCAHPS Survey)

Based on 535 completed surveys. Response rate: 15%.

Patients who reported that their nurses "Always" communicated well

Response: 74% Score: Not Applicable

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

Response: 7% 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: 80% Score: Not Applicable

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

Response: 6% Score: Not Applicable

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

Response: 14% Score: Not Applicable

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

Response: 71% Score: Not Applicable

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

Response: 8% 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: 70% Score: Not Applicable

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

Response: 9% Score: Not Applicable

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

Response: 21% Score: Not Applicable

Patients who reported that their doctors "Always" communicated well

Response: 76% Score: Not Applicable

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

Response: 8% Score: Not Applicable

Patients who reported that their doctors "Usually" communicated well

Response: 16% Score: Not Applicable

Doctor communication - linear mean score

Response: Not Applicable% Score: 89

Doctor communication - star rating

Response: Not Applicable% Score: Not Applicable

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

Response: 83% Score: Not Applicable

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

Response: 6% Score: Not Applicable

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

Response: 11% Score: Not Applicable

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

Response: 74% Score: Not Applicable

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

Response: 8% Score: Not Applicable

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

Response: 18% Score: Not Applicable

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

Response: 70% Score: Not Applicable

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

Response: 9% Score: Not Applicable

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

Response: 21% Score: Not Applicable

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

Response: 55% Score: Not Applicable

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

Response: 26% Score: Not Applicable

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

Response: 19% Score: Not Applicable

Communication about medicines - linear mean score

Response: Not Applicable% Score: 72

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: 70% 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: 16% Score: Not Applicable

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

Response: 41% Score: Not Applicable

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

Response: 39% Score: Not Applicable

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

Response: 20% Score: Not Applicable

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

Response: 16% Score: Not Applicable

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

Response: 84% Score: Not Applicable

Discharge information - linear mean score

Response: Not Applicable% Score: 83

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: 19% Score: Not Applicable

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

Response: 81% Score: Not Applicable

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

Response: 13% Score: Not Applicable

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

Response: 87% Score: Not Applicable

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

Response: 77% Score: Not Applicable

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

Response: 6% Score: Not Applicable

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

Response: 17% Score: Not Applicable

Cleanliness - linear mean score

Response: Not Applicable% Score: 90

Cleanliness - star rating

Response: Not Applicable% Score: Not Applicable

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

Response: 57% Score: Not Applicable

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

Response: 10% Score: Not Applicable

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

Response: 33% Score: Not Applicable

Quietness - linear mean score

Response: Not Applicable% Score: 82

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: 85

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: 10% Score: Not Applicable

Patients who reported YES, they would definitely recommend the hospital

Response: 67% Score: Not Applicable

Patients who reported YES, they would probably recommend the hospital

Response: 23% 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 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 ST DAVID'S SOUTH AUSTIN MEDICAL CENTER

ST DAVID'S SOUTH AUSTIN MEDICAL CENTER is a acute care hospitals located in Austin, Texas. The facility is proprietary 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 535 surveys available for review.