Division of General Medicine and Primary Care, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston 02120, MA, USA.
Med Care. 2011 Feb;49(2):126-31. doi: 10.1097/MLR.0b013e3181d5690f.
Performance reporting is increasingly focused on physician practice sites and individual physicians.
To assess the reliability of performance measurement for practice sites and individual physicians.
We used data collected across multiple payers as part of a statewide measurement collaborative to evaluate the observed measure reliability and sample size requirements to achieve acceptable reliability of 4 Health Care Effectiveness Data and Information Set measures of preventive care and 10 Health Care Effectiveness Data and Information Set measures of chronic care across 334 practice sites. We conducted a parallel set of physician-level analyses using data across 118 primary physicians practicing within a large multispecialty group.
Observed reliabilities and estimated sample size requirements to achieve reliability ≥0.70.
At the practice site level, sample sizes required to achieve a reliability of 0.70 were less than 200 patients per site for all 4 measures of preventive care, all 4 process measures of diabetes care, and 2 outcomes measures of diabetes care. Larger samples were required to achieve reliability for cholesterol screening in the presence of cardiovascular disease (n = 249) and use of appropriate asthma medications (n = 351). At the physician level, less than 200 patients were required for all 4 measures of preventive care, but for many chronic care measures the samples of patients available per physician were not sufficient to achieve a reliability of 0.70.
In a multipayer collaborative, sample sizes were adequate to reliably assess clinical process and outcome measures at the practice site level. For individual physicians, sample sizes proved adequate to reliably measure preventive care, but may not be feasible for chronic care assessment.
绩效报告越来越关注医生的执业地点和个人医生。
评估实践地点和个人医生绩效测量的可靠性。
我们使用了多个支付者收集的数据,作为全州范围测量协作的一部分,以评估观察指标的可靠性和样本量要求,以实现 334 个实践地点的 4 项健康保健效果数据和信息集(Health Care Effectiveness Data and Information Set,HEDIS)预防保健措施和 10 项 HEDIS 慢性护理措施的可接受可靠性。我们使用在一个大型多专科集团内执业的 118 名初级医生的数据进行了一组平行的医生水平分析。
观察可靠性和估计达到可靠性≥0.70 的样本量要求。
在实践地点层面,为达到 0.70 的可靠性,每个地点需要的样本量对于所有 4 项预防保健措施、所有 4 项糖尿病护理过程措施和 2 项糖尿病护理结果措施均少于 200 例患者。在存在心血管疾病的情况下(n = 249)和使用适当的哮喘药物时(n = 351),需要更大的样本量才能获得胆固醇筛查的可靠性。在医生层面,所有 4 项预防保健措施的样本量都少于 200 例患者,但对于许多慢性护理措施,每个医生可用的患者样本量不足以达到 0.70 的可靠性。
在多支付者协作中,样本量足以可靠地评估实践地点层面的临床过程和结果测量。对于个体医生来说,样本量足以可靠地衡量预防保健,但可能不适用于慢性护理评估。