Center for Innovation to Implementation, VA Palo Alto Healthcare System, Palo Alto, CA, USA.
Stanford-Surgery Policy Improvement Research and Education Center, Department of Surgery, Stanford, CA, USA.
Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2022 Sep 1;480(9):1743-1750. doi: 10.1097/CORR.0000000000002175. Epub 2022 Mar 11.
The American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons recently proposed quality measures for the initial surgical treatment of carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS). One measure addressed avoidance of adjunctive surgical procedures during carpal tunnel release; and a second measure addressed avoidance of routine use of clinic-based occupational and/or physical therapy (OT/PT) after carpal tunnel release. However, for quality measures to serve their intended purposes, they must be tested in real-world data to establish that gaps in quality exist and that the measures yield reliable performance information.
QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: (1) Is there an important quality gap in clinical practice for avoidance of adjunctive surgical procedures during carpal tunnel release? (2) Is there an important quality gap in avoiding routine use of clinic-based occupational and/or physical therapy after carpal tunnel release? (3) Do these two quality measures have adequate beta-binomial signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) and split-sample reliability (SSR)?
This retrospective comparative study used a large national private insurance claims database, the 2018 Optum Clinformatics® Data Mart. Ideally, healthcare quality measures are tested within data reflective of the providers and payors to which the measures will be applied. We previously tested these measures in a large public healthcare system and a single academic medical center. In this study, we sought to test the measures in the broader context of patients and providers using private insurance. For both measures, we included the first carpal tunnel release from 28,083 patients performed by one of 7236 surgeons, irrespective of surgical specialty (including, orthopaedic, plastic, neuro-, and general surgery). To calculate surgeon-level descriptive and reliability statistics, analyses were focused on the 66% (18,622 of 28,083) of patients who received their procedure from one of the 24% (1740 of 7236) of surgeons with at least five carpal tunnel releases in the database. No other inclusion/exclusion criteria were applied. To determine whether the measures reveal important gaps in treatment quality (avoidance of adjunctive procedures and routine therapy), we calculated descriptive statistics (median and interquartile range) of the performance distribution stratified by surgeon-level annual volume of carpal tunnel releases in the database (5+, 10+, 15+, 20+, 25+, and 30+). Like the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), we considered a measure "topped out" if median performance was greater than 95%, meaning the opportunity for further quality improvement is low. We calculated the surgeon-level beta-binomial SNR and SSR for each measure, each stratified by the number of carpal tunnel releases performed by each surgeon in the database. These are standard measures of reliability in health care quality measurement science. The SNR quantifies the proportion of variance that is between rather than within surgeons, and the SSR is the correlation of performance scores when each surgeons' patients are split into two random samples and then corrected for sample size.
We found that 2% (308 of 18,622) of carpal tunnel releases involved an adjunctive procedure. The results showed that avoidance of adjunctive surgical procedures during carpal tunnel release had a median (IQR) performance of 100% (100% to 100%) at all case volumes. Only 8% (144 of 1740) of surgeons with at least five cases in the database had less than 100% performance, and only 5% (84 of 1740) had less than 90% performance. This means adjunctive procedures were rarely performed and an important quality gap does not exist based on the CMS criterion. Regarding the avoidance of routine therapy, there was a larger quality gap: For surgeons with at least five cases in the database, median performance was 89% (75% to 100%), and 25% (435 of 1740) of these surgeons had less than 75% performance. This signifies that the measure is not topped out and may reveal an important quality gap. Most patients receiving clinic-based OT/PT had only one visit in the 6 weeks after surgery. Median (IQR) SNRs of the first measure, which addressed avoidance of adjunctive surgical procedures, and the second measure, which addresses avoidance of routine use clinic-based OT/PT, were 1.00 (1.00 to 1.00) and 0.86 (0.67 to 1.00), respectively. The SSR for these measures were 0.87 (95% CI 0.85 to 0.88) and 0.75 (95% CI 0.73 to 0.77), respectively. All of these reliability statistics exceed National Quality Forum's emerging minimum standard of 0.60.
The first measure, the avoidance of adjunctive surgical procedures during carpal tunnel release, lacked an important quality gap suggesting it is unlikely to be useful in driving improvements. The second measure, avoidance of routine use of clinic-based OT/PT, revealed a larger quality gap and had very good reliability, suggesting it may be useful for quality monitoring and improvement purposes.
As healthcare systems and payors use the second measure, avoidance of routine use of clinic-based OT/PT, to encourage adherence to clinical practice guidelines (such as provider profiling, public reporting, and payment policies), it will be critically important to consider what proportion of patients receiving OT/PT should be considered routine practice and therefore inconsistent with guidelines. The value or potential harm of this measure depends on this judgement.
美国矫形外科医师学会最近提出了腕管综合征(CTS)初始手术治疗的质量指标。其中一个指标涉及避免在腕管松解术中附加手术;第二个指标涉及避免在腕管松解术后常规使用诊所的职业和/或物理治疗(OT/PT)。然而,为了使质量指标达到预期目的,必须在真实数据中进行测试,以确定质量差距的存在,并确保该指标提供可靠的性能信息。
问题/目的:(1)在避免腕管松解术中附加手术方面,临床实践中是否存在重要的质量差距?(2)在避免常规使用诊所的职业和/或物理治疗后,是否存在重要的质量差距?(3)这两个质量指标是否具有足够的β二项式信噪比(SNR)和分样可靠性(SSR)?
这项回顾性比较研究使用了一个大型的私人保险索赔数据库,即 2018 年 Optum Clinformatics®数据集市。理想情况下,医疗保健质量指标应在与其将要应用的提供者和支付者相对应的数据中进行测试。我们之前在一个大型公共医疗系统和一个学术医学中心中测试了这些指标。在这项研究中,我们试图在更广泛的患者和提供者背景下使用私人保险来测试这些指标。对于这两个指标,我们都包括了 7236 名外科医生中 18622 名(28083 名患者中的 66%)接受的第一次腕管松解术,无论手术专业如何(包括骨科、整形外科、神经科和普通外科)。为了计算外科医生级别的描述性和可靠性统计数据,分析集中在数据库中至少进行了 5 次腕管松解术的 1740 名外科医生(7236 名外科医生中的 24%)的 18622 名患者中的 66%。没有应用其他纳入/排除标准。为了确定这些指标是否揭示了治疗质量(避免附加手术和常规治疗)方面的重要差距,我们根据外科医生数据库中每年腕管松解术的体积(5+、10+、15+、20+、25+和 30+),对绩效分布进行了描述性统计(中位数和四分位距)。与医疗保险和医疗补助服务中心(CMS)一样,如果中位表现大于 95%,我们认为该指标“达到峰值”,这意味着进一步提高质量的机会较低。我们为每个指标计算了外科医生级别的β二项式 SNR 和 SSR,每个指标都根据数据库中每位外科医生进行的腕管松解术数量进行分层。这些是医疗保健质量测量科学中可靠性的标准衡量标准。SNR 量化了外科医生之间的差异比例,而不是外科医生内部的差异比例,SSR 是将每个外科医生的患者分为两个随机样本并进行样本量校正后的绩效评分相关性。
我们发现,2%(18622 名患者中的 308 名)的腕管松解术涉及附加手术。结果表明,在所有病例量中,避免腕管松解术中附加手术的中位(四分位距)表现为 100%(100%至 100%)。只有 8%(数据库中至少有 5 例的 1740 名外科医生中的 144 名)的外科医生表现低于 100%,只有 5%(数据库中至少有 5 例的 1740 名外科医生中的 84 名)的外科医生表现低于 90%。这意味着附加手术很少进行,根据 CMS 的标准,不存在重要的质量差距。关于避免常规治疗,存在更大的质量差距:对于数据库中至少有 5 例的外科医生,中位表现为 89%(75%至 100%),其中 25%(数据库中至少有 5 例的 1740 名外科医生中的 435 名)的外科医生表现低于 75%。这表明该指标并未达到峰值,可能存在重要的质量差距。大多数接受诊所职业和/或物理治疗的患者在手术后的 6 周内只接受了一次治疗。第一个指标(避免附加手术)和第二个指标(避免常规使用诊所职业和/或物理治疗)的中位(四分位距)SNR 分别为 1.00(1.00 至 1.00)和 0.86(0.67 至 1.00)。这两个指标的 SSR 分别为 0.87(95%CI 0.85 至 0.88)和 0.75(95%CI 0.73 至 0.77)。所有这些可靠性统计数据均超过了国家质量论坛的新兴最低标准 0.60。
第一个指标,即避免腕管松解术中附加手术,不存在重要的质量差距,这表明它不太可能有助于提高质量。第二个指标,即避免常规使用诊所的职业和/或物理治疗,揭示了更大的质量差距,并且具有很好的可靠性,这表明它可能有助于质量监测和改进。
随着医疗保健系统和支付者使用第二个指标,即避免常规使用诊所的职业和/或物理治疗,鼓励遵守临床实践指南(如提供者概况、公共报告和支付政策),考虑应将接受职业和/或物理治疗的患者比例视为常规实践,因此与指南不一致,这一点至关重要。该指标的价值或潜在危害取决于这一判断。