Suppr超能文献

样本人群的选择是否会影响绩效感知:对绩效评估的启示。

Can choice of the sample population affect perceived performance: implications for performance assessment.

机构信息

Department of Health Care Policy, Harvard Medical School, 180 Longwood Avenue, Boston, MA 02215, USA.

出版信息

J Gen Intern Med. 2010 Feb;25(2):104-9. doi: 10.1007/s11606-009-1153-z.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

There is accelerating interest in measuring and reporting the quality of care delivered by health care providers and organizations, but methods for defining the patient panels for which they are held accountable are not well defined.

OBJECTIVES

To examine the potential impact of using alternative algorithms to define accountable patient populations for performance assessment.

RESEARCH DESIGN

We used administrative data regarding Community Health Center (CHC) visits in simulations of performance assessment for breast, cervical, and colorectal cancer screening.

PARTICIPANTS

Fifteen CHC sites in the northeastern US.

MEASURES

We used three different algorithms to define patient populations eligible for measurement of cancer screening rates and simulated center-level performance rates based on these alternative population definitions.

RESULTS

Focusing on breast cancer screening, the percentage of women aged 51-75 eligible for this measure across CHCs, if using the most stringent algorithm (requiring a visit in the assessment year plus at least one visit in the 2 years prior), ranged from 28% to 60%. Analogous ranges for cervical and colorectal cancer screening were 18-59% and 26-62%, respectively. Simulated performance data from the centers demonstrate that variations in eligible patient populations across health centers could lead to the appearance of large differences in health center performance or differences in expected rankings of CHCs when no such differences exist. For instance, when holding performance among similar populations constant, but varying the proportion of populations seen across different health centers, simulated health center adherence to screening guidelines varied by over 15% even though actual adherence for similar populations did not differ.

CONCLUSIONS

Quality measurement systems, such as those being used in pay-for-performance and public reporting programs, must consider the definitions used to identify sample populations and how such populations might differ across providers, clinical practice groups, and provider systems.

摘要

背景

人们对衡量和报告医疗保健提供者和医疗机构提供的医疗质量的兴趣日益浓厚,但用于定义他们应负责的患者群体的方法尚未得到很好的定义。

目的

研究使用替代算法来定义用于绩效评估的责任患者群体的潜在影响。

研究设计

我们使用有关社区卫生中心(CHC)就诊的行政数据,对乳腺癌、宫颈癌和结直肠癌筛查的绩效评估进行模拟。

参与者

美国东北部的 15 个 CHC 站点。

措施

我们使用三种不同的算法来定义有资格衡量癌症筛查率的患者人群,并根据这些替代人群定义模拟中心级别的绩效率。

结果

以乳腺癌筛查为例,如果使用最严格的算法(要求在评估年度内就诊且至少在之前两年内就诊一次),则各个 CHC 中 51-75 岁女性有资格接受此措施的比例从 28%到 60%不等。宫颈癌和结直肠癌筛查的类似范围分别为 18-59%和 26-62%。中心的模拟绩效数据表明,不同医疗中心之间合格患者人群的差异可能导致医疗中心绩效的差异或在没有差异的情况下 CHC 预期排名的差异。例如,当保持相似人群的绩效不变,而改变不同医疗中心的人群比例时,模拟医疗中心对筛查指南的遵守情况差异超过 15%,尽管相似人群的实际遵守情况没有差异。

结论

质量衡量系统,如在绩效支付和公共报告计划中使用的系统,必须考虑用于识别样本人群的定义,以及这些人群在提供者、临床实践组和提供者系统之间可能存在的差异。

相似文献

1
Can choice of the sample population affect perceived performance: implications for performance assessment.
J Gen Intern Med. 2010 Feb;25(2):104-9. doi: 10.1007/s11606-009-1153-z.
2
Hypothesis generation using network structures on community health center cancer-screening performance.
J Biomed Inform. 2015 Oct;57:288-307. doi: 10.1016/j.jbi.2015.08.005. Epub 2015 Aug 11.
6
Inadequate Systems to Support Breast and Cervical Cancer Screening in Primary Care Practice.
J Gen Intern Med. 2016 Oct;31(10):1148-55. doi: 10.1007/s11606-016-3726-y. Epub 2016 Jun 1.
7
10
Prevalence and implications of multiple cancer screening needs among Hispanic community health center patients.
Cancer Causes Control. 2011 Sep;22(9):1343-9. doi: 10.1007/s10552-011-9807-7. Epub 2011 Jul 5.

引用本文的文献

3
When quality indicators undermine quality: bias in a quality indicator of follow-up for alcohol misuse.
Psychiatr Serv. 2013 Oct;64(10):1018-25. doi: 10.1176/appi.ps.201200449.
4
Methodological challenges of measuring primary care delivery to pediatric medicaid beneficiaries who use community health centers.
Am J Public Health. 2013 Feb;103(2):273-5. doi: 10.2105/AJPH.2012.300884. Epub 2012 Dec 13.
5
Effect of patient selection method on provider group performance estimates.
Med Care. 2011 Aug;49(8):780-5. doi: 10.1097/MLR.0b013e31821b3604.
7
Improving the performance of performance measurement.
J Gen Intern Med. 2010 Feb;25(2):100-1. doi: 10.1007/s11606-009-1198-z.

本文引用的文献

1
Pay for performance in commercial HMOs.
N Engl J Med. 2006 Nov 2;355(18):1895-902. doi: 10.1056/NEJMsa063682.
2
Physician clinical performance assessment: prospects and barriers.
JAMA. 2003 Sep 3;290(9):1183-9. doi: 10.1001/jama.290.9.1183.

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验