The information is provided by hospitals on every case they handle and could provide consumers data on which hospital have the highest mortality rate for a certain procedure, for example.

But the Data Oversight Council, a 16-member panel appointed by the governor, controls the information and refuses to release it, saying the public wouldn't understand it.

Publicly releasing the data would help consumers make better decisions and force bad hospitals to improve, said Lisa McGiffert, a senior policy analyst with the Austin, Texas, office of Consumers Union, the nonprofit group that publishes Consumer Reports magazine.

"We believe that unless the public sees it, hospitals will not have the incentive to improve," McGiffert said.

The council uses the data for research only and never identifies individual hospitals.

"I've spent too much time in my life working with the data to know it can do more harm than good," said James Rook, a Greenville investment adviser who is chairman of the council.

Rook's seat is reserved for businesses not in health care. He says the data the state collects is not the best source for measuring quality of care and could taint good hospitals.

A spokesman for Gov. Mark Sanford said the governor hasn't looked specifically at the issue of releasing the information. "The governor has a bias toward openness and allowing the free flow of information between the people and their government," said Sanford spokesman Will Folks.

The health care industry has lagged others in reporting information in part because of worries about malpractice lawsuits and because the field is complicated.

Some states, however, such as New York and Pennsylvania, allow information about specific health care providers to be shared with the public.

A study by New York City's Mount Sinai School of Medicine found that since the state began releasing information in 1989, death rates from heart surgery decreased 41 percent statewide.

Kristine Smith, a spokeswoman for the New York State Health Department credits the information program with forcing poor-performing doctors out of the state and hospitals with problems started programs to improve their care.

"The bar has been raised for everybody and patients are the ones who benefit," Smith said.

In South Carolina, the state collects 3 million medical records a year from health care providers including hospitals. The providers can be fined as much as $5,000 a case for failing to file on a quarterly basis.

Some information is available. For instance, the public can find out on a Web site how many heart surgeries a hospital performed, but can't find out how many patients died during or immediately after those surgeries.

The information isn't subject to the state's disclosure laws because a separate law was passed to keep it private, state officials say.

The South Carolina Hospital Association opposes wide release of the data because of its limitations, said Ken Shull, president of the group, which represents about 90 hospitals and holds a seat on the oversight council. "If we're going to give something to the public, it needs to be accurate," Shull said.

Information from: The State