Achieving the Potential of Health Care Performance Measures: Timely Analysis of Immediate Health Policy issues

The United States is on the cusp of a new era, with greater demand for performance information, greater data availability, and a greater willingness to integrate performance information into public policy. This era has immense promise to deliver a learning health care system that encourages collaborative improvements in systems-based care, improves accountability, helps consumers make important choices, and improves quality at an acceptable cost. However, to curtail the possibility of unintended adverse consequences, it is important that we invest in developing sound measures, understand quality measures' strengths and limitations, study the science of quality measurement, and reduce inaccurate inferences about provider performance

Measurement Error in Performance Studies of Health Information Technology: Lessons from the Management Literature

Just as researchers and clinicians struggle to pin down the benefits attendant to health information technology (IT), management scholars have long labored to identify the performance effects arising from new technologies and from other organizational innovations, namely the reorganization of work and the devolution of decision-making authority. This paper applies lessons from that literature to theorize the likely sources of measurement error that yield the weak statistical relationship between measures of health IT and various performance outcomes. In so doing, it complements the evaluation literature’s more conceptual examination of health IT’s limited performance impact. The paper focuses on seven issues, in particular, that likely bias downward the estimated performance effects of health IT. They are 1.) negative self-selection, 2.) omitted or unobserved variables, 3.) mis-measured contextual variables, 4.) mismeasured health IT variables, 5.) lack of attention to the specific stage of the adoption-to-use continuum being examined, 6.) too short of a time horizon, and 7.) inappropriate units-of-analysis. The authors offer ways to counter these challenges. Looking forward more broadly, they suggest that researchers take an organizationally-grounded approach that privileges internal validity over generalizability. This focus on statistical and empirical issues in health IT-performance studies should be complemented by a focus on theoretical issues, in particular, the ways that health IT creates value and apportions it to various stakeholders

The Ethical Review of Health Care Quality Improvement Initiatives: Findings From the Field

Based on surveys, examines the review mechanisms of quality improvement initiatives, including frequency; type, such as use of independent review boards; and consideration for ethical issues such as minimal risk and patient privacy and confidentiality

Characteristics of intensive care units in Michigan: Not an open and closed case

OBJECTIVE: Delivery of critical care by intensivists has been recommended by several groups. Our objective was to understand the delivery of critical care physician services in Michigan and the role of intensivists and nonintensivist providers in providing care. DESIGN: Descriptive questionnaire. PARTICIPANTS AND SETTING: Intensive care unit (ICU) directors and nurse managers at 96 sites, representing 115 ICUs from 72 hospitals in Michigan. MEASUREMENTS AND RESULTS: The primary outcome measure was the percentage of sites utilizing a closed vs. an open model of ICU care. Secondary outcome measures included the percentage of ICUs utilizing a high-intensity service model, hospital size, ICU size, type of clinician providing care, and clinical activities performed. Twenty-four (25%) sites used a closed model of intensive care, while 72 (75%) had an open model of care. Hospitals with closed ICUs were larger and had larger ICUs than sites with open ICUs ( P < 0.05). Hospitalists serving as attending physicians were strongly associated with an open ICU (odds ratio [OR] = 12.2; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 2.5-60.2), as was the absence of intensivists in the group (OR = 12.2; 95%CI = 1.4-105.8), while ICU and hospital size were not associated. At 18 sites (20%) all attendings were board certified in Critical Care. Sixty sites had less than 50% board-certified attending physicians. CONCLUSIONS: The closed intensivist-led model of intensive care delivery is not in widespread use in Michigan. In the absence of intensivists, alternate models of care, including the hospitalist model, are frequently used. Journal of Hospital Medicine 2010;5:4–9. © 2010 Society of Hospital Medicine.Peer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/64903/1/567_ftp.pd

Is quality of care improving in the UK?

Yes, but we do not know wh

Handoffs, Safety Culture, and Practices: Evidence from the Hospital Survey on Patient Safety Culture

Background: The context of the study is the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality’s Hospital Survey on Patient Safety Culture (HSOPSC). The purpose of the study is to analyze how different elements of patient safety culture are associated with clinical handoffs and perceptions of patient safety. Methods: The study was performed with hierarchical multiple linear regression on data from the 2010 Survey. We examine the statistical relationships between perceptions of handoffs and transitions practices, patient safety culture, and patient safety. We statistically controlled for the systematic effects of hospital size, type, ownership, and staffing levels on perceptions of patient safety. Results: The main findings were that the effective handoff of information, responsibility, and accountability were necessary to positive perceptions of patient safety. Feedback and communication about errors were positively related to the transfer of patient information; teamwork within units and the frequency of events reported were positively related to the transfer of personal responsibility during shift changes; and teamwork across units was positively related to the unit transfers of accountability for patients. Conclusions: In summary, staff views on the behavioral dimensions of handoffs influenced their perceptions of the hospital’s level of patient safety. Given the known psychological links between perception, attitude, and behavior, a potential implication is that better patient safety can be achieved by a tight focus on improving handoffs through training and monitoring

Validity and usefulness of members reports of implementation progress in a quality improvement initiative: findings from the Team Check-up Tool (TCT)

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Team-based interventions are effective for improving safety and quality of healthcare. However, contextual factors, such as team functioning, leadership, and organizational support, can vary significantly across teams and affect the level of implementation success. Yet, the science for measuring context is immature. The goal of this study is to validate measures from a short instrument tailored to track dynamic context and progress for a team-based quality improvement (QI) intervention.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Design: Secondary cross-sectional and longitudinal analysis of data from a clustered randomized controlled trial (RCT) of a team-based quality improvement intervention to reduce central line-associated bloodstream infection (CLABSI) rates in intensive care units (ICUs).</p> <p>Setting: Forty-six ICUs located within 35 faith-based, not-for-profit community hospitals across 12 states in the U.S.</p> <p>Population: Team members participating in an ICU-based QI intervention.</p> <p>Measures: The primary measure is the Team Check-up Tool (TCT), an original instrument that assesses context and progress of a team-based QI intervention. The TCT is administered monthly. Validation measures include CLABSI rate, Team Functioning Survey (TFS) and Practice Environment Scale (PES) from the Nursing Work Index.</p> <p>Analysis: Temporal stability, responsiveness and validity of the TCT.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>We found evidence supporting the temporal stability, construct validity, and responsiveness of TCT measures of intervention activities, perceived group-level behaviors, and barriers to team progress.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>The TCT demonstrates good measurement reliability, validity, and responsiveness. By having more validated measures on implementation context, researchers can more readily conduct rigorous studies to identify contextual variables linked to key intervention and patient outcomes and strengthen the evidence base on successful spread of efficacious team-based interventions. QI teams participating in an intervention should also find data from a validated tool useful for identifying opportunities to improve their own implementation.</p