Challenges to electronic clinical quality measurement using third-party platforms in primary care practices: the healthy hearts in the heartland experience.

Third-party platforms have emerged to support small primary care practices for calculating and reporting electronic clinical quality measures (eCQM) for federal programs like The Medicare Access and CHIP Reauthorization Act of 2015 (MACRA) and Merit-based Incentive Payment System (MIPS). Yet little is known about the capabilities and limitations of electronic health record systems (EHRs) to enable data access for these programs. We connected 116 small- to medium-sized practices with seven different EHRs to popHealth, an open-source eCQM platform. We identified the prevalence of following problems with eCQM data for data extraction in seven different EHRs: (1) Lack of coded data in five of seven; (2) Incorrectly categorized data in four of seven; (3) Isosemantic data (data within the incorrect context) in four of seven; (4) Coding that could not be directly evaluated in six of seven; (5) Errors in date assignment and labeled as historical values in five of seven; and (6) Inadequate data to assign the correct code in two of seven. We recommend specific enhancements to EHR systems that can promote effective eCQM implementation and reporting to MACRA and MIPS.

Design of healthy hearts in the heartland (H3): A practice-randomized, comparative effectiveness study.

BACKGROUND: The Healthy Hearts in the Heartland (H3) study is part of a nationwide effort, EvidenceNOW, seeking to better understand the ability of small primary care practices to improve "ABCS" clinical quality measures: appropriate Aspirin therapy, Blood pressure control, Cholesterol management, and Smoking cessation. H3 aimed to assess feasibility of implementing Point-of-Care (POC) or POC plus Population Management (POC + PM) quality improvement (QI) strategies to improve ABCS at practices in Illinois, Indiana, and Wisconsin. We describe the design and randomization of the H3 study. METHODS: We conducted a two-arm (1:1, POC:POC + PM), practice-randomized, comparative effectiveness study in 226 primary care practices across four "waves" of randomization with a 12-month intervention period, followed by a six-month sustainability period. Randomization controlled imbalance in nine baseline variables through a modified constrained algorithm. Among others, we used initial, unverified estimates of baseline ABCS values. RESULTS: We randomized 112 and 114 practices to POC and POC + PM arms, respectively. Randomization ensured baseline comparability for all nine key variables, including the ABCS measures indicating proportion of patients at the practice level meeting each quality measure. Median(Inner Quartile Range) values were A: 0.78(0.66-0.86) in POC arm vs. 0.77(0.63-0.86) in POC + PM arm, B: 0.64(0.53-0.73) vs. 0.64(0.53-0.75), C: 0.78(0.63-0.86) vs. 0.75(0.64-0.81), S: 0.80(0.65-0.81) vs. 0.79(0.61-0.91). DISCUSSION: Surrogate estimates for the true ABCS at baseline coupled with the unique randomization logic achieved adequate baseline balance on these outcomes. Similar practice- or cluster-randomized trials may consider adaptations of this design. Final analyses on 12- and 18-month ABCS outcomes for the H3 study are forthcoming. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This trial is registered on ClinicalTrials.gov (Initial post: 11/05/2015; identifier: NCT02598284; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02598284?term=NCT02598284&rank=1).