Suppr超能文献

对美国乳腺外科医师学会成员超过 100 万次质量指标-患者就诊情况进行基准测试。

Benchmarking the American Society of Breast Surgeon Member Performance for More Than a Million Quality Measure-Patient Encounters.

机构信息

Gundersen Medical Foundation, La Crosse, WI, USA.

Duke University, Durham, NC, USA.

出版信息

Ann Surg Oncol. 2018 Feb;25(2):501-511. doi: 10.1245/s10434-017-6257-9. Epub 2017 Nov 22.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Nine breast cancer quality measures (QM) were selected by the American Society of Breast Surgeons (ASBrS) for the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) Quality Payment Programs (QPP) and other performance improvement programs. We report member performance.

STUDY DESIGN

Surgeons entered QM data into an electronic registry. For each QM, aggregate "performance met" (PM) was reported (median, range and percentiles) and benchmarks (target goals) were calculated by CMS methodology, specifically, the Achievable Benchmark of Care™ (ABC) method.

RESULTS

A total of 1,286,011 QM encounters were captured from 2011-2015. For 7 QM, first and last PM rates were as follows: (1) needle biopsy (95.8, 98.5%), (2) specimen imaging (97.9, 98.8%), (3) specimen orientation (98.5, 98.3%), (4) sentinel node use (95.1, 93.4%), (5) antibiotic selection (98.0, 99.4%), (6) antibiotic duration (99.0, 99.8%), and (7) no surgical site infection (98.8, 98.9%); all p values < 0.001 for trends. Variability and reasons for noncompliance by surgeon for each QM were identified. The CMS-calculated target goals (ABC™ benchmarks) for PM for 6 QM were 100%, suggesting that not meeting performance is a "never should occur" event.

CONCLUSIONS

Surgeons self-reported a large number of specialty-specific patient-measure encounters into a registry for self-assessment and participation in QPP. Despite high levels of performance demonstrated initially in 2011 with minimal subsequent change, the ASBrS concluded "perfect" performance was not a realistic goal for QPP. Thus, after review of our normative performance data, the ASBrS recommended different benchmarks than CMS for each QM.

摘要

背景

美国乳腺外科学会(ASBrS)为医疗保险和医疗补助服务中心(CMS)质量支付计划(QPP)和其他绩效改进计划选择了 9 项乳腺癌质量措施(QM)。我们报告了成员的表现。

研究设计

外科医生将 QM 数据输入电子登记册。对于每个 QM,报告了“满足绩效”(PM)的综合数据(中位数、范围和百分位数),并根据 CMS 方法计算了基准(目标),具体来说,是采用可实现的护理基准(ABC)方法。

结果

共捕获了 2011 年至 2015 年的 1,286,011 次 QM 就诊记录。对于 7 个 QM,首次和最后一次 PM 率如下:(1) 针吸活检(95.8,98.5%);(2) 标本成像(97.9,98.8%);(3) 标本定向(98.5,98.3%);(4) 前哨淋巴结使用(95.1,93.4%);(5) 抗生素选择(98.0,99.4%);(6) 抗生素持续时间(99.0,99.8%);(7) 无手术部位感染(98.8,98.9%);所有趋势的 p 值均小于 0.001。确定了每个 QM 外科医生的变异和不合规的原因。CMS 计算的 6 个 QM 的 PM 目标(ABC™基准)为 100%,这表明不符合绩效是“绝不应该发生”的事件。

结论

外科医生自行向登记册报告了大量特定于专业的患者测量就诊记录,以进行自我评估和参与 QPP。尽管在 2011 年最初表现出高水平的绩效,并且随后几乎没有变化,但 ASBrS 得出结论,“完美”的绩效不是 QPP 的现实目标。因此,在审查我们的规范绩效数据后,ASBrS 为每个 QM 推荐了与 CMS 不同的基准。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/b042/5758679/a7cbab719de4/10434_2017_6257_Fig1_HTML.jpg

相似文献

1
Benchmarking the American Society of Breast Surgeon Member Performance for More Than a Million Quality Measure-Patient Encounters.
Ann Surg Oncol. 2018 Feb;25(2):501-511. doi: 10.1245/s10434-017-6257-9. Epub 2017 Nov 22.
3
Establishing achievable benchmarks for quality improvement in systemic therapy for early-stage breast cancer.
Cancer. 2017 Oct 1;123(19):3772-3780. doi: 10.1002/cncr.30804. Epub 2017 Jul 5.
7
Profiling Individual Surgeon Performance Using Information from a High-Quality Clinical Registry: Opportunities and Limitations.
J Am Coll Surg. 2015 Nov;221(5):901-13. doi: 10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2015.07.454. Epub 2015 Sep 9.
8
Beyond the mammography quality standards act: measuring the quality of breast cancer screening programs.
AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2014 Jan;202(1):145-51. doi: 10.2214/AJR.13.10806. Epub 2013 Nov 21.
9
Improving surgical outcomes through benchmarking.
Br J Surg. 2019 Jan;106(1):59-64. doi: 10.1002/bjs.10976. Epub 2018 Nov 28.
10
Surgeon specialization and use of sentinel lymph node biopsy for breast cancer.
JAMA Surg. 2014 Feb;149(2):185-92. doi: 10.1001/jamasurg.2013.4350.

本文引用的文献

2
Quantifying Geographic Variation in Health Care Outcomes in the United States before and after Risk-Adjustment.
PLoS One. 2016 Dec 14;11(12):e0166762. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0166762. eCollection 2016.
3
Physician Peer Comparisons as a Nonfinancial Strategy to Improve the Value of Care.
JAMA. 2016 Nov 1;316(17):1759-1760. doi: 10.1001/jama.2016.13739.
4
The Quality of Outpatient Care Delivered to Adults in the United States, 2002 to 2013.
JAMA Intern Med. 2016 Dec 1;176(12):1778-1790. doi: 10.1001/jamainternmed.2016.6217.
6
Use of National Burden to Define Operative Emergency General Surgery.
JAMA Surg. 2016 Jun 15;151(6):e160480. doi: 10.1001/jamasurg.2016.0480.
7
Establishing Benchmarks For Minimum Competence With Dry Lab Robotic Surgery Drills.
J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2016 May-Jun;23(4):633-8. doi: 10.1016/j.jmig.2016.03.014. Epub 2016 Mar 21.
9
Surgeon-Specific Reports in General Surgery: Establishing Benchmarks for Peer Comparison Within a Single Hospital.
J Am Coll Surg. 2016 Feb;222(2):113-21. doi: 10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2015.10.017. Epub 2015 Nov 21.
10
Profiling Individual Surgeon Performance Using Information from a High-Quality Clinical Registry: Opportunities and Limitations.
J Am Coll Surg. 2015 Nov;221(5):901-13. doi: 10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2015.07.454. Epub 2015 Sep 9.

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