Allen H M, Rogers W H
Coopers & Lybrand, Boston, MA 02110, USA.
Jt Comm J Qual Improv. 1996 Dec;22(12):775-94. doi: 10.1016/s1070-3241(16)30282-6.
Escalating demand in the market-place for consumer-supplied data on health plan performance has led to a growing number of competing survey instruments. Many of them offer distinct perspectives on what concepts should be measured and how they should be measured. The principal user groups of this information-purchasers, consumers, and health plans-face an increasingly complex decision when choosing between instruments.
Many of the differences between surveys arise because the three user groups apply survey results for different purposes. At the same time, a standardized instrument would provide the three user groups more information and context. A dialectic process between these two dynamics is guiding the exchange between survey developers and users and is resulting in slow if somewhat unsteady progress toward consensus on common core content across user groups.
This article seeks to promote public debate on the content and approach of consumer surveys of plan performance, a task that is separate from comparative empirical testing. Six instruments are described-the Consumer Satisfaction Survey, Employee Health Care Value Survey, Health Plan Value Check, Adult Health Care Survey, Annual Member Health Care Survey-Version 1.0, and the Consumer Health Plan Value Survey. To help differentiate the instruments, several common methodologic choice points faced by each (for example, use of "not applicable" as an option) are highlighted. The alternative approaches taken by the instruments to address these choice points are discussed in terms of the arguments for and against their use.
Although it is too early to predict which survey measures or approaches will figure most heavily in the eventual core instrument, it is not too early to anticipate that the critical decisions will be made on both academic (for example, psychometric and cognitive testing) and marketplace criteria. Increasingly influential will be collective user prerequisites emerging out of the interplay of the three user groups in the marketplace. Six key collective prerequisites (for example, defining common ground between the user groups) are identified, and their likely impact on the development of consumer surveys of health plan performance are described.
市场对消费者提供的健康计划绩效数据的需求不断增加,导致竞争的调查工具越来越多。其中许多工具对于应衡量哪些概念以及应如何衡量这些概念提供了不同的观点。这些信息的主要用户群体——购买者、消费者和健康计划——在选择工具时面临着日益复杂的决策。
调查之间的许多差异源于三个用户群体将调查结果用于不同目的。与此同时,标准化工具将为三个用户群体提供更多信息和背景。这两种动态之间的辩证过程指导着调查开发者和用户之间的交流,并正在朝着就用户群体之间的共同核心内容达成共识取得缓慢但有些不稳定的进展。
本文旨在促进关于计划绩效消费者调查的内容和方法的公开辩论,这一任务与比较实证测试是分开的。描述了六项工具——消费者满意度调查、员工医疗保健价值调查、健康计划价值检查、成人医疗保健调查、年度会员医疗保健调查1.0版和消费者健康计划价值调查。为了帮助区分这些工具,突出了每个工具面临的几个常见方法选择点(例如,使用“不适用”作为选项)。根据支持和反对使用这些选择点的论据,讨论了工具为解决这些选择点所采取的替代方法。
虽然现在预测哪些调查措施或方法将在最终的核心工具中占最重要地位还为时过早,但预测关键决策将基于学术(例如,心理测量和认知测试)和市场标准做出并不为时过早。市场中三个用户群体相互作用产生的集体用户先决条件将越来越有影响力。确定了六个关键的集体先决条件(例如,定义用户群体之间的共同点),并描述了它们对健康计划绩效消费者调查发展的可能影响。