Rodriguez Hector P, Scoggins John F, von Glahn Ted, Zaslavsky Alan M, Safran Dana Gelb
Department of Health Services, School of Public Health, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, California 90095-1772, USA.
Med Care. 2009 Aug;47(8):835-41. doi: 10.1097/MLR.0b013e318197b1e1.
Public reporting and pay-for-performance programs increasingly rely on patient experience data to evaluate individual physicians and guide quality improvement efforts. The extent to which performance variation is attributable to physicians versus other system-level units, however, remains unclear.
Using ambulatory care experience survey data from 61,839 patients of 1729 primary care physicians in California (response rate = 39.1%), this study assesses the proportion of explainable performance variation attributable to various organizational units in composite measures of physician-patient interaction, organizational features of care, and global assessments of care. For each measure, multilevel regression models that controlled for respondent characteristics and used random effects to account for the clustering of patients within physicians, physicians within care sites, care sites within medical groups, and medical groups within primary care service areas, estimated the proportion of explainable performance variation attributable to each system-level unit.
System-level factors explained between 27.9% to 47.7% of variation, with the highest proportion explained for the access to care composite and the lowest explained for the quality of chronic care composite. Physicians accounted for the largest proportion of explainable variance for all measures (range: 35.1%-49.0%). Care sites and primary care service areas explained substantial proportions of variance (>20% each) for the access to care and care coordination measures. Medical groups explained the largest proportions of variation (>20%) for global assessments of care.
Individual physicians and their care sites are the most important foci for patient experience improvement efforts. Because markets contribute substantially to performance variation on organizational features of care, future research should clarify the extent to which associated performance deficits are modifiable.
公开报告和绩效付费项目越来越依赖患者体验数据来评估个体医生并指导质量改进工作。然而,绩效差异在多大程度上可归因于医生而非其他系统层面的单位,仍不明确。
本研究使用来自加利福尼亚州1729名初级保健医生的61839名患者的门诊护理体验调查数据(回复率 = 39.1%),评估在医患互动、护理组织特征和整体护理评估的综合指标中,可解释的绩效差异归因于各个组织单位的比例。对于每个指标,采用多水平回归模型,该模型控制了受访者特征,并使用随机效应来考虑患者在医生内、医生在护理地点内、护理地点在医疗组内以及医疗组在初级保健服务区内的聚类情况,估计可解释的绩效差异归因于每个系统层面单位的比例。
系统层面因素解释了27.9%至47.7%的差异,其中护理可及性综合指标解释的比例最高,慢性护理质量综合指标解释的比例最低。在所有指标中,医生解释的可解释方差比例最大(范围:35.1% - 49.0%)。护理地点和初级保健服务区在护理可及性和护理协调指标方面解释了相当大比例的方差(各超过20%)。医疗组在整体护理评估方面解释的方差比例最大(超过20%)。
个体医生及其护理地点是改善患者体验工作的最重要重点。由于市场对护理组织特征的绩效差异有很大影响,未来研究应阐明相关绩效缺陷在多大程度上是可改变的。