Goff Sarah L, Lagu Tara, Pekow Penelope S, Hannon Nicholas S, Hinchey Kristen L, Jackowitz Talia A, Tolosky Patrick J, Lindenauer Peter K
Tufts University School of Medicine, Boston, USA.
Jt Comm J Qual Patient Saf. 2015 Apr;41(4):169-76. doi: 10.1016/s1553-7250(15)41022-0.
Hospital leaders play an important role in the success of quality improvement (QI) initiatives, yet little is known about how leaders engaged in QI currently view quality performance measures. In a follow-up to a quantitative study conducted in 2012, a study employing qualitative content analysis was conducted to (1) describe leaders' opinions about the quality measures reported on the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) Hospital Compare website, (2) to generate hypotheses about barriers/facilitators to improving hospitals' performance, and (3) to elicit recommendations about how to improve publicly reported quality measures.
The opinions of leaders from a stratified sample of 630 hospitals across the United States regarding quality measures were assessed with an open-ended prompt that was part of a 21-item questionnaire about quality measures publicly reported by CMS. Their responses were qualitatively analyzed in an iterative process, resulting in the identification of the presence and frequency of major themes and subthemes.
Participants from 131 (21%) of the 630 hospitals surveyed replied to the open-ended prompt; 15% were from hospitals with higher-than-average performance scores, and 52% were from hospitals with lower-than-average scores. Major themes included (1) concerns regarding quality measurement (measure validity, importance, and fairness) and/or public reporting; 76%); (2) positive views of quality measurement (stimulate improvement, focus efforts; 13%); and (3) recommendations for improving quality measurement.
Among hospital leaders responding to an open-ended survey prompt, some supported the concept of measuring quality, but the majority criticized the validity and utility of current quality measures. Although quality measures are frequently being reevaluated and new measures developed, the ability of such measures to stimulate improvement may be limited without greater buy-in from hospital leaders.
医院领导在质量改进(QI)举措的成功中发挥着重要作用,但目前对于参与质量改进的领导如何看待质量绩效衡量指标知之甚少。在2012年进行的一项定量研究的后续研究中,开展了一项采用定性内容分析的研究,以(1)描述领导对医疗保险和医疗补助服务中心(CMS)医院比较网站上报告的质量指标的看法,(2)生成关于提高医院绩效的障碍/促进因素的假设,以及(3)得出关于如何改进公开报告的质量指标的建议。
通过一个开放式提示来评估来自美国630家医院的分层样本中的领导对质量指标的看法,该提示是一份关于CMS公开报告的质量指标的21项问卷的一部分。他们的回答在一个迭代过程中进行定性分析,从而确定主要主题和子主题的存在及频率。
630家接受调查的医院中有131家(21%)的参与者回复了开放式提示;15%来自绩效得分高于平均水平的医院,52%来自绩效得分低于平均水平的医院。主要主题包括:(1)对质量衡量(指标有效性、重要性和公平性)和/或公开报告的担忧(76%);(2)对质量衡量的积极看法(促进改进、集中精力;13%);以及(3)改进质量衡量的建议。
在回应开放式调查提示的医院领导中,一些人支持质量衡量的概念,但大多数人批评当前质量指标的有效性和实用性。尽管质量指标经常被重新评估并制定新的指标,但如果没有医院领导更大程度的认同,这些指标促进改进的能力可能会受到限制。