Suppr超能文献

融合群组和实践基地评分,提高医师质量信息的可靠性。

Blending group and practice site scores to increase the reliability of physician quality information.

机构信息

The Institute for Clinical Research and Health Policy Studies, Tufts Medical Center, Boston, MA.

出版信息

Health Serv Res. 2014 Feb;49(1):113-26. doi: 10.1111/1475-6773.12086. Epub 2013 Jul 5.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

To use an empirical Bayesian approach, blending practice, and group quality data with physician results to increase the accuracy of quality of care measures.

DATA SOURCES

Performance data on diabetes glycemic screening for 8,357 physicians collected from multiple payers as part of a statewide physician performance reporting initiative.

STUDY DESIGN

A variance components analysis assessed the strength of group, practice, and physician effects compared with random error. We derived formulas to describe reliability and measurement error variances and calculated the optimal blend of physician, practice, and group data. We constructed a simulation to show what various methods can achieve. The value of blending strategies was assessed by simulating a common pay-for-performance criterion-performance in the top 25 percent. We estimated the proportion of physicians whose true percentage would place them in the top 20 percent but who would not receive payment based on the observed success rate.

PRINCIPAL FINDINGS

Blending reduced the error rate from 29.7 to 22.7 percent. Simpler empirical Bayes estimates using shrinkage alone produced no gains over simple doctor percentages.

CONCLUSIONS

When good structural data about physician groups and practices exist, gains from blending can be substantial.

摘要

目的

利用经验贝叶斯方法,融合实践和群体质量数据以及医生的结果,以提高医疗保健质量措施的准确性。

数据来源

从多个支付方收集的 8357 名医生的糖尿病血糖筛查表现数据,作为全州医生绩效报告倡议的一部分。

研究设计

方差分量分析评估了群体、实践和医生效应与随机误差相比的强度。我们推导出了描述可靠性和测量误差方差的公式,并计算了医生、实践和群体数据的最佳混合。我们构建了一个模拟来展示各种方法可以实现什么。通过模拟常见的按绩效付费标准(前 25%的表现)来评估混合策略的价值。我们估计了真实百分比将他们排在前 20%但由于观察到的成功率而不会获得报酬的医生比例。

主要发现

混合将错误率从 29.7%降低到 22.7%。仅使用收缩的简单经验贝叶斯估计并没有比简单的医生百分比产生任何收益。

结论

当存在关于医生群体和实践的良好结构性数据时,混合的收益可能会很大。

相似文献

1
Blending group and practice site scores to increase the reliability of physician quality information.
Health Serv Res. 2014 Feb;49(1):113-26. doi: 10.1111/1475-6773.12086. Epub 2013 Jul 5.
4
The impact of pay-for-performance on diabetes care in a large network of community health centers.
J Health Care Poor Underserved. 2007 Nov;18(4):966-83. doi: 10.1353/hpu.2007.0090.
5
HEDIS measures can make practices almost perfect.
Physician Relat Update. 1998 Mar;7(3):32-3.
6
Using Consistently Low Performance to Identify Low-Quality Physician Groups.
JAMA Netw Open. 2021 Jul 1;4(7):e2117954. doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2021.17954.
9

本文引用的文献

1
The comprehensive care project: measuring physician performance in ambulatory practice.
Health Serv Res. 2010 Dec;45(6 Pt 2):1912-33. doi: 10.1111/j.1475-6773.2010.01160.x. Epub 2010 Sep 1.
2
Cost profiles: should the focus be on individual physicians or physician groups?
Health Aff (Millwood). 2010 Aug;29(8):1532-8. doi: 10.1377/hlthaff.2009.1091.
3
Reliability of medical group and physician performance measurement in the primary care setting.
Med Care. 2011 Feb;49(2):126-31. doi: 10.1097/MLR.0b013e3181d5690f.
6
Statistical methodology for classifying units on the basis of multiple-related measures.
Stat Med. 2008 Apr 30;27(9):1329-50. doi: 10.1002/sim.3187.
7
Comparing physicians on efficiency.
N Engl J Med. 2007 Dec 27;357(26):2649-52. doi: 10.1056/NEJMp0706521.
8
Pay for performance in commercial HMOs.
N Engl J Med. 2006 Nov 2;355(18):1895-902. doi: 10.1056/NEJMsa063682.
9
Paying for quality: providers' incentives for quality improvement.
Health Aff (Millwood). 2004 Mar-Apr;23(2):127-41. doi: 10.1377/hlthaff.23.2.127.

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