What grade did North Ala. hospitals receive from the Leapfrog Hospital Safety report?
NORTH ALABAMA (WHNT) — North Alabama hospitals received grades ranging from an A to two Fs.
The Leapfrog Group is an independent national nonprofit focused on patient safety. On May 1, the group released its grade reports for hospitals across the nation for Spring 2025.
The report card is like a school grade scale: A, B, C, D and F. These grades are 'assigned to all general hospitals in the United States based on their ability to protect patients from medical errors, accidents, injuries and infections,' the Leapfrog Group said.
Hospitals receive a score in multiple categories within the following sections: Infections, Problems with Surgery, Safety Problems, Practices to Prevent Errors and Doctors, Nurses & Hospital Staff. Each section can have up to seven different categories that can be given a performance score of Worse than Average, Average and Better than Average, which plays into the overall hospital grade.
Disclaimer: The Leapfrog Hospital Safety Grade scores hospitals on their overall performance in keeping patients safe from preventable harm and medical errors. The grades are derived from expert analysis of publicly available data using up to 31 evidence-based, national measures of hospital safety.
In the list, 13 North Alabama hospitals were graded, receiving a grade anywhere from A to F. But, which hospital received what grade? Find out in the list below!
Based on the data, Helen Keller Hospital is overall considered worse than average in the section titled 'Practices to Prevent Errors.' Specifically, handwashing, safe medication administration, and doctors' orders medications through the computer were in the red zone.
That being said, the 'Safety Problems' section, most of the reports from the data suggest the hospital is better than average. For this section, there were seven categories that the hospital was rated on. Five of the seven were labeled as better than average, while one was labeled as average and one was labeled as below average.
In previous years, Helen Keller Hospital received a relatively similar score, receiving a C for both Fall and Spring 2024, and a D for Fall 2023 and a C for Spring 2023.
Based on data collected from Leapfrog, the Shoals Hospital received a C for its Spring 2025 grade. While this seems bad, the data collected from Leapfrog isn't complete. Out of 32 categories to grade the hospital on, only 14 of the categories are given a performance level. Seven of those 14 rated categories scored better than average, showing up the most in the 'Practices to Prevent Errors' section.
The 18 other categories that were not given a performance level were labeled as 'not available.' Based on Leapfrog's website, ''Not Available' means that the hospital does not have data for this measure. This could be because the measure is related to a service the hospital does not provide. For example, a hospital that does not have an ICU would not be able to report data about ICUs. It could also be because the hospital had too few patients or cases to report data for a particular condition or procedure. A 'Not Available' result does not mean that the hospital withheld information from the public,' the group said.
The hospital, based on previous reports, has been all over the grade scale. In 2022, the hospital received an F for the Spring but a B for the Fall. In 2023, Shoals Hospital received a C for the Spring but a D for the Fall. For 2024, the hospital received a C for the entire year.
DeKalb Regional Medical Center was the ONLY North Alabama hospital to receive an A on its Spring 2025 report card. 14 of the categories were rated as better than average, with the best section being the 'Doctors, Nurses & Hospital Staff.'
A point of concern seemed to stem from the 'Problems with Surgery' section, where only one of the seven categories was rated as better than average. The rest were considered average, with one category labeled as worse than average. Still, the hospital received a 0.00 score for this section. The best hospital's score was graded as 0.00, with the worst being 0.327 and the average being 0.014.
In years past, DeKalb Regional Medical Center has been consistent in its scoring. In 2024, it received A's across the board for the year. In 2023, the hospital received a C for the Spring but an A for the Fall.
The Russellville Hospital received a C based on the data collected from Leapfrog, mainly due to the 'Practices to Prevent Errors' section. In this section, four of the six categories are labeled as worse than average, with communication about discharge labeled as average and the staff work together to prevent errors category blank because the hospital declined to report this information to the public.
The best section for the hospital could be considered as the 'Problems with Surgery' section, as four of the seven categories were given a performance score. Two of these categories received an average performance grade, while one received a better-than-average performance score and one received a worse-than-average performance score.
The Russellville Hospital, based on data from years past, seems to stay consistent with either a B or a C grade. In 2024, the hospital received a B for the Spring but a C for the Fall, similarly to 2023, where the Spring grade was a C but the Fall grade was a B.
Highlands Medical Center seemed to struggle in the 'Practices to Prevent Errors' section of the grading because four of the five categories given a performance score were considered worse than average. The hospital received a score of 15 for this section, simply because the Leapfrog data said the hospital declined to report its performance on this measure, so a score was assigned to reflect the lack of information available. The highest hospital score for this section was a 100, with the average hospital receiving an 80.23 score.
The hospital performed its best in the 'Problems with Surgery' category, receiving an average performance score from four of the five scored categories.
This grade is an improvement for the hospital, according to Leapfrog data. This is the first time the hospital has received a C since Spring 2022. After that, the hospital has continuously received a D on its report card until now.
The North Alabama Medical Center was one of two North Alabama hospitals that received this grade. For the sections that Leapfrog graded on, the 'Infections' section was given the best performance score. Six of the six categories in this section received a better-than-average performance score. The hospital received a 0.00 score, with the highest hospital's score being a 0.00. The average hospital's score was 0.719, and the hospital with the worst score in this section received a 2.850.
The section where this hospital could work on more is 'Safety Problems.' Seven categories were given a performance score. Two were scored as worse than average and four were given an average performance score.
In recent years, the hospital received a B for 2024, and Cs for both 2023 and 2022.
The area for improvement for the Athens-Limestone Hospital is 'Safety Problems.' Of the seven categories, four were given an average performance score and two were given a worse-than-average score. The hospital received an overall 1.00 score for this section. The hospital with the best score received a 0.53, the worst score was a 3.10 and the average hospital received a 1.00 score.
The Athens-Limestone Hospital scored the best in the 'Infections' section. Its overall score was 0.00, with the best score for a hospital being 0.00. The hospital with the worst score received a 2.850, and the average hospital score was 0.719.
For 2024, the hospital received a D for the Spring and a C for the Fall. For 2023 as a whole, it received a C.
Crestwood Medical Center, while receiving worse-than-average performance scores in the 'Doctors, Nurses & Hospital Staff' section, the hospital received better overall scores for the section. Five of the six categories in this section were in the red and one category was rated as average. However, the hospital's score was a 101.54 overall score, with the best hospital's score being 120.00. The hospital with the worst score received a 9.23 and the average hospital received a 117.49 score.
The hospital had the best overall performance score in the 'Problems with Surgery' section. Out of the seven categories, two were considered better than average, four were considered average and one was worse than average.
The grade of a C is a step up from the most recent grade for 2024, being a D for Fall and a C for Spring.
Huntsville Hospital was one of the two lowest-ranking hospitals in North Alabama. The hospital's worst-scoring section was 'Practices to Prevent Errors.' Its overall score was 15, according to Leapfrog. This is because the hospital reportedly declined to report its performance on this section, so Leapfrog assigned the hospital a score to reflect the lack of information available. Five of the six categories in this section were scored. Three of the five categories were scored worse than average while the other two were scored as average.
The hospital had the best section in 'Problems with Surgery.' While the performance scores appear to be low, the overall score provided by Leapfrog shows the hospital scored the same as the best hospital's score: 0.00. The average hospital score was 0.014 and the worst hospital scored 0.327.
This grade is one step down from 2024, with a grade of D. In both 2023 and 2022, Huntsville Hospital receied a C grade.
Madison Hospital was the other hospital in North Alabama to receive the lowest grade. The hospital received almost identical performance and overall scores to Huntsville Hospital. The hospital's worst-scoring section was 'Practices to Prevent Errors.' Its overall score was 15, according to Leapfrog. The average score for this section was 80.23, with the highest score being 100.
Madison Hospital's best-scoring section was also 'Problems with Surgery.' While the performance scores appear to be low, the overall score provided by Leapfrog shows the hospital scored the same as the best hospital's score: 0.00.
In 2024, the hospital also received a D for the year, which was a small step down from 2023. This year, the hospital received a C grade for the Spring and a D grade for the Fall.
Marshall Medical Center North was the only North Alabama hospital to receive a D grade. Based on available Leapfrog data, the hospital received the worst performance scores for the 'Infections' section. Its overall score was 2.452. The best score was 0.00, the worst was 2.850 and the average score was 0.719.
The hospital's best scoring section was 'Problems with Surgery.' Three of the seven sections are scored as better than average, two are average and two are scored as worse than average.
This grade is consistent with previous Leapfrog data. For 2024, the Marshall Medical Center North received a D for the Spring and a C for the Fall. However, for both 2023 and 2022, the hospital received a D grade.
The Decatur-Morgan Hospital-Decatur Campus had four of the five sections scoring in the nationwide best hospital's score: 'Infections,' 0.00; 'Problems with Surgery,' 0.00; 'Practices to Prevent Errors,' 100; 'Doctors, Nurses & Hospital Staff,' 120.
The worst section, scored for the hospital, was 'Safety Problems.' In this section, the hospital received an overall score of 1.17. The best hospital scored a 0.53, with the worst hospital scoring a 3.10.
This grade is consistent with previous years, considering 2024's yearly score was a B. In 2023, the hospital scored a C for the Spring, and the grade for the Fall was a B.
You can find out all the hospitals in Alabama or nationwide that were given a grade on the Leapfrog Hospital Safety Grade website here.
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Washington Post
24 minutes ago
- Washington Post
Scottie Scheffler joins Tiger Woods as only repeat winners at Memorial
DUBLIN, Ohio — Scottie Scheffler is winning with such alarming regularity that describing his dominance is not a comfortable topic. So when he won the Memorial on Sunday for the second straight year, he at least had tournament host Jack Nicklaus at his side. Nicklaus is a great authority when it comes to Scheffler because the Golden Bear sees so much of himself in the world's No. 1 player.


Medscape
25 minutes ago
- Medscape
ADA Issues New MASLD Guidelines
A new consensus report from the American Diabetes Association (ADA) provides a practice-oriented framework for screening and managing metabolic dysfunction–associated steatotic liver disease (MASLD) in people with diabetes and prediabetes. Published online on May 28, 2025, in Diabetes Care, the report is a comprehensive update to the recommendations the ADA released in 2023. It is intended for clinicians treating patients with diabetes — primarily type 2 diabetes (T2D) — but also type 1 diabetes with obesity and prediabetes. Topics covered include the rationale for the recent change in terminology, epidemiology, fibrosis risk stratification, monitoring, treatment, and referral guidance, with interprofessional team management emphasized throughout. 'This will provide primary care doctors and anyone taking care of people with diabetes the tools to diagnose [MASLD] early and guide therapy…to prevent cirrhosis, and refer to the hepatologist as needed for additional therapy and monitoring,' lead author Kenneth Cusi, MD, professor of medicine at the Division of Endocrinology, Diabetes & Metabolism in the Department of Medicine at the University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida, told Medscape Medical News . The guidelines recommend that clinicians routinely screen people with T2D or prediabetes for MASLD. 'We explain that the liver should be incorporated into our management in the same way we do for chronic kidney disease, eye disease, and nerve disease as an end-organ damage that is particularly affected by diabetes,' Cusi said. In the United States, at least 70% of people with T2D have MASLD, about half of whom have the more progressive form termed metabolic dysfunction–associated steatohepatitis (MASH). About 1 in 5 with T2D have advanced liver fibrosis. The presence of MASH increases the risks for complications including cirrhosis, hepatocellular carcinoma, and overall mortality, according to the new consensus report. Liver disease has not been a focus of diabetes management until recently, Cusi noted. 'We didn't think about it. The epidemic of obesity, and with that, of diabetes, is driving this liver disease. The obesity epidemic has had a big worsening since the 1990s, so this damage in the past 20 or 30 years is just now becoming evident in the liver.' Terminology Change: Highlighting Insulin Resistance, Reducing Stigma The document reviews the current nomenclature for SLD, which was officially changed in 2023 to remove the words 'fatty' and 'alcoholic.' Now, MASLD is defined as the presence of SLD with at least one metabolic risk factor such as obesity, hypertension, prediabetes, high triglycerides, low high-density lipoprotein cholesterol, or T2D, with minimal or no alcohol consumption (< 20 g/d for women; < 30 g/d for men). The term 'MetALD' is used for those with MASLD who also have increased alcohol consumption (20-50 g/d for women; 30-60 g/day for men). Steatosis in the setting of alcohol consumption above those levels is termed 'alcohol-associated liver disease (ALD).' The term MASH is defined as steatohepatitis with at least one metabolic risk factor and minimal alcohol consumption. 'At-risk MASH' refers to steatohepatitis with clinically significant fibrosis (stage F2 or higher). Diagnosis: Staged Screening for Fibrosis The document recommends routine screening of people with T2D, prediabetes, and/or obesity with cardiovascular risk factors, with the goal of identifying those with high-risk MASH. Intervention is then aimed at preventing fibrosis progression and cirrhosis. A graphic diagnostic algorithm advises initial use of the noninvasive Fibrosis-4 (FIB-4) tool, which risk stratifies based on age, liver enzymes, and platelet count. 'The FIB-4 is composed of very simple things that are already in the electronic medical record of all patients. We also discuss the role of electronic medical records to improve implementation,' Cusi said. Those with a FIB-4 < 1.3 have a low risk for future cirrhosis and can be managed in primary or team care with optimized lifestyle and repeated FIB-4 every 1-2 years. If the FIB-4 is > 2.67, direct referral to a liver specialist is advised. If FIB-4 is between 1.3 and 2.67, a second risk-stratification test is recommended. Ideally, this would be a liver stiffness measurement (LSM), most commonly with transient elastography. If that is unavailable, an alternative is the noninvasive enhanced liver fibrosis (ELF) test. If the LSM is < 8.0 kPa or ELF is < 7.7, the fibrosis risk is low and routine management can continue with repeat testing in 1-2 years. But if higher, hepatology referral is recommended. Treatment: Lifestyle, Plus Old and New Drugs The report details lifestyle modification for MASLD, including nutrition plans; physical activity; behavioral health; and the role of diabetes self-management, education and support. The role of obesity treatment in people with MASLD, both metabolic surgery and pharmacotherapy, is also discussed at length. No current pharmacologic treatments have been approved for MASLD, but both semaglutide and tirzepatide have demonstrated benefit in treating MASH and are approved for treating T2D, obesity, and other related comorbidities. A thyroid hormone receptor beta agonist, resmetirom, was approved in early 2024 for the treatment of MASH with fibrosis stages F2 and F3, but is extremely expensive at about $50,000 a year, Cusi noted. An older, generic glucose-lowering drug, pioglitazone, has also shown benefit in reducing fibrosis and may be a lower-cost alternative. The document also includes a section on alcohol intake, which complicates the MASLD picture, Cusi noted. 'We think that this is going to help doctors to consider alcohol, which is often overlooked and under-reported. If patients have moderate fibrosis, they should completely quit alcohol.' Cusi has received research support (to his institution) from Boehringer Ingelheim, Echosens, Inventiva, Labcorp, and Perspectum, and has served as a consultant for Aligos Therapeutics, Arrowhead, AstraZeneca, 89bio, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Boehringer Ingelheim, Eli Lilly, GlaxoSmithKline, Novo Nordisk, ProSciento, Sagimet Biosciences, Siemens USA, Zealand Pharma, and Terns Pharmaceuticals.
Yahoo
25 minutes ago
- Yahoo
BarEhud Barak: Israel Must Back Trump's Gaza Deal
U.S. President Donald Trump greets Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu as he arrives at the White House on April 7, 2025, in Washington, D.C. Credit - Alex Wong—Getty Images In the coming few days, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu will face a defining choice between a politically motivated "war of deception" in Gaza and a deal to release all hostages while ending the war. He must choose between his extreme-right ministers—Itamar Ben-Gvir and Bezalel Smotrich—or aligning with Donald Trump. There is no symmetry here. Accepting a hostage deal, ending the war, and working with Trump and free world leaders, won't be effortless. Any choice requires detailed negotiations and compromises. But this path is far superior to any realistic alternative. Based on the achievements of the Israel Defense Forces—including damage to Hamas, weakening Hezbollah, destroying Syria's military arsenal during Assad's collapse, and demonstrating Israel's capability to strike deep into Iran—Israeli leadership could, from a position of strength, pursue releasing all hostages simultaneously, halt this senseless war, end the humanitarian crisis, and uproot Hamas from power. This would enable Israel, though belatedly, to join Trump's vision of a New Middle East, including normalization with Saudi Arabia, regional deployment to tackle the Iranian challenge, and participation in the trade corridor project from India through the Gulf to Europe. Choosing a "war of deception" instead—where misleading propaganda presents political warfare as serving Israel's security—would be a grave mistake. It's highly doubtful that continuing the war could produce results different from previous Gaza rounds over the past 20 months. But it would certainly constitute a death sentence for some or most living hostages and deepen the diplomatic tsunami and International Criminal Court claims Israel already faces. This approach might make sense if it could achieve "total victory" over Hamas, but that won't happen. When this new war inevitably halts—under diplomatic pressure, humanitarian crisis, battlefield events, or domestic political developments—we would find ourselves in precisely the same situation as today. To understand, examine recent history. The October 7th barbaric attack created a compelling imperative for Israel to ensure Hamas could never again reign over Gaza or threaten Israel from there. The question was how to achieve this goal. Since Ben-Gurion, Israel has followed four strategic maxims: wars should be aggressive, fought on enemy territory, ended quickly to translate battlefield results into diplomatic and political realities while maintaining international legitimacy, and—extremely important—never lose the moral high ground. That's how we won in 1967 in six days and 1973 in three weeks. Netanyahu has betrayed almost all these principles. Read More: The Israel-Hamas Ceasefire Was Never Going to Last Another strategic maxim, from Clausewitz to Kissinger, holds that war must have a clearly defined, operationally feasible political purpose. As the Roman saying goes: "If you don't know which port you want to reach, no wind will take you there." This maxim was deliberately ignored. Netanyahu has blocked any discussion of this issue since October 7th, 2023. It was clear to any serious observer that Hamas suffered major military blows daily, losing most weapons systems and leadership figures since October 7th. However, since any Hamas group or individual can easily "disappear" within minutes, hiding among the Strip's 2 million civilians and emerging from tunnels or building windows to attack Israelis, their absolute elimination remains a Sisyphean task. Even after 58 years in the West Bank, we never fully eliminated Hamas' presence in Jenin or Tulkarm. The only way to ensure Hamas cannot reign over Gaza and threaten Israel is by replacing it with another governing entity legitimate to the international community, Arab neighbors like Egypt, UAE, and Saudi Arabia, and Palestinians themselves. Practically, this means a temporary inter-Arab force backed by the Arab League, potentially supported by UN Security Council resolution, funded by Saudi Arabia and UAE, with a technocratic government overseeing Palestinian bureaucracy and a new, non-Hamas security body trained by the inter-Arab force under U.S. supervision. Israel would present only two conditions: no Hamas military branch member could participate in the new entity's organs, and the IDF, initially deployed to the Strip's perimeter, would withdraw to the border only after all pre-agreed security benchmarks are met. This plan, easily implementable a year ago, and appearing to save Gaza and Gazans from further destruction, is harder now, because it could be interpreted as saving Israel from sinking into Gazan mud. But the plan remains viable despite the Israeli government's refusal to consider it. Since this is the only practical "day after" plan, there's no sense sacrificing hostages' lives or endangering Israeli troops in pointless warfare. Who can look into the eyes of future bereaved parents, newly widowed spouses, new orphans, disabled and traumatized soldiers, and claim with clear conscience that everything was done to prevent loss, or that it had justification? As long as Israel rejects hostage release and war's end, the risk increases of international initiatives, including Arab neighbors calling for Israel boycotts and steps toward recognition of a Palestinian state by European countries—many of them stable friends of Israel. Read More: I Am a Former Hamas Hostage. Here's My Message to Donald Trump and Benjamin Netanyahu Permanent occupation of the Gaza Strip, population transfer of 2 million Palestinians, and Israeli resettlement on the that land are base and delusional visions that would backfire and accelerate confrontation with the world. Why is Netanyahu, an intelligent, experienced, savvy politician, failing? The answer isn't simple. Netanyahu has ruled since 2015 through an alliance with ultra-Orthodox parties who don't serve in the army and care only about sectoral needs, and since January 2023 added ultra-right zealots believing Gaza resettlement and Palestinian transfer are heavenly orders. He's caught in a dilemma: 80% of the public sees him as primarily responsible for the country's worst day, 60% believe he should resign. A heavy majority perceives his judicial reform, initiated immediately after January 2023 elections, as a "judicial coup d'état"—an attempt to castrate the legislative branch and demolish Supreme Court independence. Many believe the aim of his blatant attack on democracy is to escape his bribery, fraud, and breach of trust court case. For him, any pause in the war—even 60 days, certainly longer—would immediately bring reckoning and accountability: accelerated court proceedings; demands for national inquiry committee investigating October 7th, and events before, during and after; coalition meltdown; and probable disgraced ejection from public life. I believe Netanyahu genuinely wants all hostages home. But when this clashes with immediate threats to his political survival, he prefers leaving them in Gaza. He has already torpedoed several hostage deal opportunities, and seems to be doing it once again over the weekend, by resisting U.S. guarantee to Hamas for an end to the war in exchange for release of all hostages and entering, together with the Trump Administration, into Trump's New Middle East Order (to include the replacement of Hamas, described above). Netanyahu sticks to his eternal war in order to avoid a pause in fighting, which might lead to the end of his political career. This behavior is unacceptable to Israel and Israelis. We are, as former Supreme Court President Aharon Barak wrote years ago, 'defending democracy' that "should be capable of defending itself against those who try to use the very freedoms and tools it provides to destroy it from within." We're led by someone who lost his strategic and moral compass, dragging the nation into war motivated by personal political interests against our security and common future. Israel urgently needs new, sober leadership with clear realistic vision and self-confidence—leadership capable of reading our people's soul, understanding partners' and rivals' minds, and above all, having courage to make decisions and power to implement them. The world will pass judgment. But the burden of bringing Israel back on track is ours—Israeli citizens. I believe we will overcome. This war will end soon, and Israel's worst ever government will be replaced by a responsible, effective one. A long path of repair must follow. Contact us at letters@