• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

要跨越鸿沟,需要质量改进。

It takes quality improvement to cross the chasm.

机构信息

Quality Improvement, Local Initiative Health Authority, Los Angeles, California, USA

Quality Improvement, Local Initiative Health Authority, Los Angeles, California, USA.

出版信息

BMJ Open Qual. 2023 Jul;12(3). doi: 10.1136/bmjoq-2022-001906.

DOI:10.1136/bmjoq-2022-001906
PMID:37487653
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10373703/
Abstract

Healthcare organisations in the USA rank significantly lower in quality of care compared with other developed nations. Research shows US performance emphasises expensive treatment over effective prevention programmes. This study demonstrates how a comprehensive quality improvement programme can improve health outcomes in a large county-based Medicaid health plan. The health plan serves a diverse community of members spanning racial and ethnic groups with varying levels of clinical risk and social determinants of health burdens. We used a regression discontinuity design to evaluate the impact of a comprehensive quality improvement programme vs using mainly pay-for-performance on Healthcare Effectiveness Data and Information Set (HEDIS) metrics over the course of 10 years. We found significant improvements in several HEDIS metrics that occurred after the quality improvement programme was implemented. These results demonstrate the importance of using a comprehensive quality improvement strategy along with pay-for-performance to improve health outcomes. It was determined that this research was exempt from institutional review board approval, as it used administrative healthcare data, and did not involve direct interventions with human subjects.

摘要

美国的医疗保健组织在医疗质量方面的排名明显低于其他发达国家。研究表明,美国的表现强调昂贵的治疗方法,而不是有效的预防方案。本研究展示了一个全面的质量改进计划如何改善一个大型基于医疗补助的医疗保健计划中的健康结果。该医疗保健计划为不同种族和族裔群体的成员提供服务,这些成员的临床风险和健康负担的社会决定因素各不相同。我们使用回归不连续性设计来评估全面质量改进计划对医疗保健效果数据和信息集(HEDIS)指标的影响,在 10 年的时间里主要使用基于绩效的支付方式。我们发现,在实施质量改进计划后,HEDIS 指标中的几个指标有了显著的改善。这些结果表明,使用全面的质量改进策略以及基于绩效的支付方式对于改善健康结果非常重要。确定本研究无需机构审查委员会批准,因为它使用了行政医疗保健数据,并且不涉及与人类受试者的直接干预。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/66aa/10373703/99384b8f11ef/bmjoq-2022-001906f02.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/66aa/10373703/a95950c45c30/bmjoq-2022-001906f01.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/66aa/10373703/99384b8f11ef/bmjoq-2022-001906f02.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/66aa/10373703/a95950c45c30/bmjoq-2022-001906f01.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/66aa/10373703/99384b8f11ef/bmjoq-2022-001906f02.jpg

相似文献

1
It takes quality improvement to cross the chasm.要跨越鸿沟,需要质量改进。
BMJ Open Qual. 2023 Jul;12(3). doi: 10.1136/bmjoq-2022-001906.
2
Evaluating a Pay-for-Performance Program for Medicaid Children in an Accountable Care Organization.评价在一个责任医疗组织中针对医疗补助儿童的按绩效付费计划。
JAMA Pediatr. 2016 Mar;170(3):259-66. doi: 10.1001/jamapediatrics.2015.3809.
3
Quality Measures and Quality Improvement Initiatives in Osteoporosis-an Update.骨质疏松症的质量指标和质量改进措施更新。
Curr Osteoporos Rep. 2019 Dec;17(6):491-509. doi: 10.1007/s11914-019-00547-5.
4
The effect of pay-for-performance in nursing homes: evidence from state Medicaid programs.养老院按绩效付费的效果:来自州医疗补助计划的证据。
Health Serv Res. 2013 Aug;48(4):1393-414. doi: 10.1111/1475-6773.12035. Epub 2013 Feb 10.
5
Public reporting and pay for performance in hospital quality improvement.医院质量改进中的公开报告与绩效薪酬
N Engl J Med. 2007 Feb 1;356(5):486-96. doi: 10.1056/NEJMsa064964. Epub 2007 Jan 26.
6
Impact of performance-based budgeting on quality outcomes in U.S. military health care facilities.基于绩效的预算对美国军事医疗机构质量结果的影响。
Health Care Manage Rev. 2023;48(3):249-259. doi: 10.1097/HMR.0000000000000372. Epub 2023 May 12.
7
Clinician-Directed Performance Improvement: Moving Beyond Externally Mandated Metrics.临床医生主导的绩效改进:超越外部规定的指标
Health Aff (Millwood). 2020 Feb;39(2):264-272. doi: 10.1377/hlthaff.2019.00505.
8
The future of Cochrane Neonatal.考克兰新生儿协作网的未来。
Early Hum Dev. 2020 Nov;150:105191. doi: 10.1016/j.earlhumdev.2020.105191. Epub 2020 Sep 12.
9
The effect of financial incentives on the quality of health care provided by primary care physicians.经济激励措施对初级保健医生所提供医疗服务质量的影响。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2011 Sep 7(9):CD008451. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD008451.pub2.
10
Observing Provider Utilization of Electronic Health Records to Improve Clinical Quality Metrics.观察医疗服务提供者对电子健康记录的使用情况,以改善临床质量指标。
Perspect Health Inf Manag. 2022 Jan 1;19(1):1o. eCollection 2022 Winter.

本文引用的文献

1
Is the evidence on the effectiveness of pay for performance schemes in healthcare changing? Evidence from a meta-regression analysis.医疗保健领域绩效薪酬计划有效性的证据是否正在改变?来自元回归分析的证据。
BMC Health Serv Res. 2021 Feb 24;21(1):175. doi: 10.1186/s12913-021-06118-8.
2
CMS Innovation Center at 10 Years - Progress and Lessons Learned.医保与医疗补助服务中心创新中心成立十周年——进展与经验教训
N Engl J Med. 2021 Feb 25;384(8):759-764. doi: 10.1056/NEJMsb2031138. Epub 2021 Jan 13.
3
Composite measures of healthcare quality: sensible in theory, problematic in practice.
医疗质量的综合指标:理论上合理,实践中存在问题。
BMJ Qual Saf. 2019 Feb;28(2):85-88. doi: 10.1136/bmjqs-2018-008280. Epub 2018 Sep 17.
4
The problem with composite indicators.综合指标的问题。
BMJ Qual Saf. 2019 Apr;28(4):338-344. doi: 10.1136/bmjqs-2018-007798. Epub 2018 Aug 12.
5
The New CMS Hospital Quality Star Ratings: The Stars Are Not Aligned.新的医疗保险和医疗补助服务中心(CMS)医院质量星级评级:星级并不一致。
JAMA. 2016 Nov 1;316(17):1761-1762. doi: 10.1001/jama.2016.13679.
6
The effectiveness of payment for performance in health care: A meta-analysis and exploration of variation in outcomes.医疗保健中绩效薪酬的有效性:一项荟萃分析及结果差异探究。
Health Policy. 2016 Oct;120(10):1141-1150. doi: 10.1016/j.healthpol.2016.09.002. Epub 2016 Sep 5.
7
Interrupted time series regression for the evaluation of public health interventions: a tutorial.中断时间序列回归在公共卫生干预措施评价中的应用:教程。
Int J Epidemiol. 2017 Feb 1;46(1):348-355. doi: 10.1093/ije/dyw098.
8
The Stars of Hospital Care: Useful or a Distraction?医院护理之星:有用还是干扰?
JAMA. 2016 Jun 7;315(21):2265-6. doi: 10.1001/jama.2016.5638.
9
National hospital ratings systems share few common scores and may generate confusion instead of clarity.国家医院评级系统几乎没有共同的评分标准,可能会造成混淆而非清晰明了。
Health Aff (Millwood). 2015 Mar;34(3):423-30. doi: 10.1377/hlthaff.2014.0201.
10
Better-than-average and worse-than-average hospitals may not significantly differ from average hospitals: an analysis of Medicare Hospital Compare ratings.优于平均水平和劣于平均水平的医院与平均水平的医院可能没有显著差异:对医疗保险医院比较评级的分析。
BMJ Qual Saf. 2015 Feb;24(2):128-34. doi: 10.1136/bmjqs-2014-003405. Epub 2014 Nov 13.