Quality indicators for osteoarthritis pain management in the primary care setting.

BACKGROUND: Development of valid and feasible quality indicators (QIs) is needed to track quality initiatives for osteoarthritis pain management in primary care settings. METHODS: Literature search identified published guidelines that were reviewed for QI extraction. A panel of 14 experts was assembled, including primary care physicians, rheumatologists, orthopedic surgeons, pain specialists, and outcomes research pharmacists. A screening survey excluded QIs that cannot be reliably extracted from the electronic health record or that are irrelevant for osteoarthritis in primary care settings. A validity screening survey used a 9-point Likert scale to rate the validity of each QI based on predefined criteria. During expert panel discussions, stakeholders revised QI wording, added new QIs, and voted to include or exclude each QI. A priority survey used a 9-point Likert scale to prioritize the included QIs. RESULTS: Literature search identified 520 references published from January 2015 to March 2021 and 4 additional guidelines from professional/governmental websites. The study included 41 guidelines. Extraction of 741 recommendations yielded 115 candidate QIs. Feasibility screening excluded 28 QIs. Validity screening and expert panel discussion excluded 73 QIs and added 1 QI. The final set of 15 prioritized QIs focused on pain management safety, education, weight-management, psychological wellbeing, optimizing first-line medications, referral, and imaging. CONCLUSION: This multi-disciplinary expert panel established consensus on QIs for osteoarthritis pain management in primary care settings by combining scientific evidence with expert opinion. The resulting list of 15 prioritized, valid, and feasible QIs can be used to track quality initiatives for osteoarthritis pain management.

Quality indicators to measure the effect of opioid stewardship interventions in hospital and emergency department settings.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this project was to develop a set of valid and feasible quality indicators used to track opioid stewardship efforts in hospital and emergency department settings. METHODS: Candidate quality indicators were extracted from published literature. Feasibility screening excluded quality indicators that cannot be reliably extracted from the electronic health record or that are irrelevant to pain management in the hospital and emergency department settings. Validity screening used an electronic survey of key stakeholders including pharmacists, nurses, physicians, administrators, and researchers. Stakeholders used a 9-point Likert scale to rate the validity of each quality indicator based on predefined criteria. During expert panel discussions, stakeholders revised quality indicator wording, added new quality indicators, and voted to include or exclude each quality indicator. Priority ranking used a second electronic survey and a 9-point Likert scale to prioritize the included quality indicators. RESULTS: Literature search yielded 76 unique quality indicators. Feasibility screening excluded 9 quality indicators. The validity survey was completed by 46 (20%) of 228 stakeholders. Expert panel discussions yielded 19 valid and feasible quality indicators. The top 5 quality indicators by priority were: the proportion of patients with (1) naloxone administrations, (2) as needed opioids with duplicate indications, and (3) long acting or extended release opioids if opioid-naïve, (4) the average dose of morphine milligram equivalents administered per day, and (5) the proportion of opioid discharge prescriptions exceeding 7 days. CONCLUSION: Multi-professional stakeholders across a health system participated in this consensus process and developed a set of 19 valid and feasible quality indicators for opioid stewardship interventions in the hospital and emergency department settings.