The evolution of healthcare quality measurement in the United States.

Quality measurement is fundamental to systematic improvement of the healthcare system. Whilst the United States has made significant investments in healthcare quality measurement and improvement, progress has been somewhat limited. Public and private payers in the United States increasingly mandate measurement and reporting as part of pay-for-performance programmes. Numerous issues have limited improvement, including lack of alignment in the use of measures and improvement strategies, the fragmentation of the U.S. healthcare system, and the lack of national electronic systems for measurement, reporting, benchmarking and improvement. Here, we provide an overview of the evolution of U.S. quality measurement efforts, including the role of the National Quality Forum. Important contextual changes such as the growing shift towards electronic data sources and clinical registries are discussed together with international comparisons. In future, the U.S. healthcare system needs to focus greater attention on the development and use of measures that matter. The three-part aim of effective care, affordable care and healthy communities in the U.S. National Quality Strategy focuses attention on population health and reduction in healthcare disparities. To make significant improvements in U.S. health care, a closer connection between measurement and both evolving national data systems and evidence-based improvement strategies is needed.

Intention to discontinue care among primary care patients: influence of physician behavior and process of care.

BACKGROUND: Specific elements of health care process and physician behavior have been shown to influence disenrollment decisions in HMOs, but not in outpatient settings caring for patients with diverse types of insurance coverage. OBJECTIVE: To examine whether physician behavior and process of care affect patients' intention to return to their usual health care practice. DESIGN: Cross-sectional patient survey and medical record review. SETTING: Eleven academically affiliated primary care medicine practices in the Boston area. PATIENTS: 2,782 patients with at least one visit in the preceding year. MEASUREMENT: Unwillingness to return to the usual health care practice. RESULTS: Of the 2,782 patients interviewed, 160 (5.8%) indicated they would not be willing to return. Two variables correlated significantly with unwillingness to return after adjustment for demographics, health status, health care utilization, satisfaction with physician's technical skill, site of care, and clustering of patients by provider: dissatisfaction with visit duration (odds ratio [OR], 3.2; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.4 to 7.4) and patient reports that the physician did not listen to what the patient had to say (OR, 8.8; 95% CI, 2.5 to 30.7). In subgroup analysis, patients who were prescribed medications at their last visit but who did not receive an explanation of the purpose of the medication were more likely to be unwilling to return (OR, 4.9; 95% CI, 1.8 to 13.3). CONCLUSION: Failure of physicians to acknowledge patient concerns, provide explanations of care, and spend sufficient time with patients may contribute to patients' decisions to discontinue care at their usual site of care.

Influence of financial productivity incentives on the use of preventive care.

PURPOSE: We examined whether physician factors, particularly financial productivity incentives, affect the provision of preventive care. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: We surveyed and reviewed the charts of 4,473 patients who saw 1 of 169 internists from 11 academically affiliated primary care practices in Boston. We abstracted cancer risk factors, comorbid conditions, and the dates of the last Papanicolaou (Pap) smear, mammogram, cholesterol screening, and influenza vaccination. We obtained physician information including the method of financial compensation through a mailed physician survey. We used multivariable logistic regression to examine the association between physician factors and four outcomes based on Health Plan Employer Data and Information Set (HEDIS) measures: (1) Pap smear within the prior 3 years among women 20 to 75 years old; (2) mammogram in the prior 2 years among women 52 to 69 years old; (3) cholesterol screening within the prior 5 years among patients 40 to 64 years old; and (4) influenza vaccination among patients 65 years old and older. All analyses accounted for clus-tering by provider and site and were converted into adjusted rates. RESULTS: After adjustment for practice site, clinical, and physician factors, patients cared for by physicians with financial productivity incentives were significantly less likely than those cared for by physicians without this incentive to receive Pap smears (rate difference, 12%; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 5% to 18%) and cholesterol screening (rate difference, 4%; 95% CI: 0% to 8%). Financial incentives were not significantly associated with rates of mammography (rate difference, -3%; 95% CI: -15% to 10%) or influenza vaccination (rate difference, -13%; 95% CI: -28% to 2%). CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that some financial productivity incentives may discourage the performance of certain forms of preventive care, specifically Pap smears and cholesterol screening. More studies are needed to examine the effects of financial incentives on the quality of care, and to examine whether quality improvement interventions or incentives based on quality improve the performance of preventive care.

Delay in seeking emergency care.

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether patient clinical and socioeconomic characteristics predict patient delay in coming to the emergency department (ED). METHODS: Adult ED patients at five urban teaching hospitals were surveyed regarding self-reported delay in coming to the ED. Delay was measured by self-perception as well as by the number of days ill and unable to work. Patient socioeconomic and clinical characteristics were obtained by survey questionnaire and chart review. Cross-sectional analysis within a prospective study of 4,094 consecutive patients was performed using a subset of 1,920 patients (84% eligible rate) to whom questionnaires were administered. RESULTS: Overall, 32% of the patients completing the survey reported delay in seeking ED care. Of these patients reporting delay, 71% thought their problem would go away or was not serious. Patients who were older, had higher acuity, or were frequent ED users reported less delay in coming to the ED, while patients without a regular physician or who were African American reported more delay. Perception of increased number of days ill prior to visiting the ED was reported by frequent ED users and those with worse baseline physical function, while patients who had higher acuity reported fewer days ill prior to coming to the ED. CONCLUSIONS: A patient's decision to delay coming to the ED often reflects a belief that his or her illness is either self-limited or not serious. The decision to delay correlates with patient characteristics and access to a regular physician. The correlates of delay in seeking ED care may depend on the delay measure used. Better understanding of patients at risk for delaying care may influence interventions to reduce delay.

Negligent care and malpractice claiming behavior in Utah and Colorado.

BACKGROUND: Previous studies relating the incidence of negligent medical care to malpractice lawsuits in the United States may not be generalizable. These studies are based on data from 2 of the most populous states (California and New York), collected more than a decade ago, during volatile periods in the history of malpractice litigation. OBJECTIVES: The study objectives were (1) to calculate how frequently negligent and nonnegligent management of patients in Utah and Colorado in 1992 led to malpractice claims and (2) to understand the characteristics of victims of negligent care who do not or cannot obtain compensation for their injuries from the medical malpractice system. DESIGN: We linked medical malpractice claims data from Utah and Colorado with clinical data from a review of 14,700 medical records. We then analyzed characteristics of claimants and nonclaimants using evidence from their medical records about whether they had experienced a negligent adverse event. MEASURES: The study measures were negligent adverse events and medical malpractice claims. RESULTS: Eighteen patients from our study sample filed claims: 14 were made in the absence of discernible negligence and 10 were made in the absence of any adverse event. Of the patients who suffered negligent injury in our study sample, 97% did not sue. Compared with patients who did sue for negligence occurring in 1992, these nonclaimants were more likely to be Medicare recipients (odds ratio [OR], 3.5; 95% CI [CI], 1.3 to 9.6), Medicaid recipients (OR, 3.6; 95% CI, 1.4 to 9.0), > or =75 years of age (OR, 7.0; 95% CI, 1.7 to 29.6), and low income earners (OR, 1.9; 95% CI, 0.9 to 4.2) and to have suffered minor disability as a result of their injury (OR, 6.3; 95% CI, 2.7 to 14.9). CONCLUSIONS: The poor correlation between medical negligence and malpractice claims that was present in New York in 1984 is also present in Utah and Colorado in 1992. Paradoxically, the incidence of negligent adverse events exceeds the incidence of malpractice claims but when a physician is sued, there is a high probability that it will be for rendering nonnegligent care. The elderly and the poor are particularly likely to be among those who suffer negligence and do not sue, perhaps because their socioeconomic status inhibits opportunities to secure legal representation.

Is the professional satisfaction of general internists associated with patient satisfaction?

BACKGROUND: The growth of managed care has raised a number of concerns about patient and physician satisfaction. An association between physicians' professional satisfaction and the satisfaction of their patients could suggest new types of organizational interventions to improve the satisfaction of both. OBJECTIVE: To examine the relation between the satisfaction of general internists and their patients. DESIGN: Cross-sectional surveys of patients and physicians. SETTING: Eleven academically affiliated general internal medicine practices in the greater-Boston area. PARTICIPANTS: A random sample of English-speaking and Spanish-speaking patients (n = 2,620) with at least one visit to their physician (n = 166) during the preceding year. MEASUREMENTS: Patients' overall satisfaction with their health care, and their satisfaction with their most recent physician visit. MAIN RESULTS: After adjustment, the patients of physicians who rated themselves to be very or extremely satisfied with their work had higher scores for overall satisfaction with their health care (regression coefficient 2.10; 95% confidence interval 0.73-3.48), and for satisfaction with their most recent physician visit (regression coefficient 1.23; 95% confidence interval 0.26-2.21). In addition, younger patients, those with better overall health status, and those cared for by a physician who worked part-time were significantly more likely to report better satisfaction with both measures. Minority patients and those with managed care insurance also reported lower overall satisfaction. CONCLUSIONS: The patients of physicians who have higher professional satisfaction may themselves be more satisfied with their care. Further research will need to consider factors that may mediate the relation between patient and physician satisfaction.

Using diagnoses to describe populations and predict costs.

The Diagnostic Cost Group Hierarchical Condition Category (DCG/HCC) payment models summarize the health care problems and predict the future health care costs of populations. These models use the diagnoses generated during patient encounters with the medical delivery system to infer which medical problems are present. Patient demographics and diagnostic profiles are, in turn, used to predict costs. We describe the logic, structure, coefficients and performance of DCG/HCC models, as developed and validated on three important data bases (privately insured, Medicaid, and Medicare) with more than 1 million people each.

Principal inpatient diagnostic cost group model for Medicare risk adjustment.

The Balanced Budget Act (BBA) of 1997 required HCFA to implement health-status-based risk adjustment for Medicare capitation payments for managed care plans by January 1, 2000. In support of this mandate, HCFA has been collecting inpatient encounter data from health plans since 1997. These data include diagnoses and other information that can be used to identify chronic medical problems that contribute to higher costs, so that health plans can be paid more when they care for sicker patients. In this article, the authors describe the risk-adjustment model HCFA is implementing in the year 2000, known as the Principal Inpatient Diagnostic Cost Group (PIPDCG) model.

Using information systems to measure and improve quality.

Information systems (IS) are increasingly important for measuring and improving quality. In this paper, we describe our integrated delivery system's plan for and experiences with measuring and improving quality using IS. Our belief is that for quality measurement to be practical, it must be integrated with the routine provision of care and whenever possible should be done using IS. Thus, at one hospital, we now perform almost all quality measurement using IS. We are also building a clinical data warehouse, which will serve as a repository for quality information across the network. However, IS are not only useful for measuring care, but also represent powerful tools for improving care using decision support. Specific areas in which we have already seen significant benefit include reducing the unnecessary use of laboratory testing, reporting important abnormalities to key providers rapidly, prevention and detection of adverse drug events, initiatives to change prescribing patterns to reduce drug costs and making critical pathways available to providers. Our next major effort will be introduce computerized guidelines on a more widespread basis, which will be challenging. However, the advent of managed care in the US has produced strong incentives to provide high quality care at low cost and our perspective is that only with better IS than exist today will this be possible without compromising quality. Such systems make feasible implementation of quality measurement, care improvement and cost reduction initiatives on a scale which could not previously be considered.

Hospital admissions through the emergency department: does insurance status matter?

PURPOSE: To assess the effect of insurance status on the probability of admission and subsequent health status of patients presenting to emergency departments. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: We performed a prospective cohort study of patients with common medical problems at five urban, academic hospital emergency departments in Boston and Cambridge, Massachusetts. The outcome measure for the study was admission to the hospital from the emergency department and functional health status at baseline and follow-up. RESULTS: During a 1-month period, 2,562 patients younger than 65 years of age presented with either abdominal pain (52%), chest pain (19%) or shortness of breath (29%). Of the 1,368 patients eligible for questionnaire, 1,162 (85%) completed baseline questionnaires, and of these, 964 (83%) completed telephone follow-up interviews 10 days later. Fifteen percent of patients were uninsured and 34% were admitted to the hospital from the emergency department. Uninsured patients were significantly less likely than insured patients to be admitted, both when adjusting for urgency, chief complaint, age, gender and hospital (odds ratio = 0.5, 95% confidence interval 0.3 to 0.7), and when additionally adjusting for comorbid conditions, lack of a regular physician, income, employment status, education and race (odds ratio = 0.4, 95% confidence interval 0.2 to 0.8). However, there were no differences in adjusted functional health status between admitted and nonadmitted patients by insurance status, either at baseline or at 10-day follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: Uninsured patients with one of three common chief complaints appear to be less frequently admitted to the hospital than are insured patients, although health status does not appear to be affected. Whether these results reflect underutilization among uninsured patients or overutilization among insured patients remains to be determined.

Nonurgent emergency department visits: the effect of having a regular doctor.

OBJECTIVES: The authors assess the association between having a regular doctor and presentation for nonurgent versus urgent emergency department visits while controlling for potential confounders such as sociodemographics, health status, and comorbidity. METHODS: A cross-sectional study was conducted in emergency departments of five urban teaching hospitals in the northeast. Adult patients presenting with chest pain, abdominal pain, or asthma (n = 1696; 88% of eligible) were studied. Patients completed a survey on presentation, reporting sociodemographics, health status, comorbid diseases, and relationship with a regular doctor. Urgency on presentation was assessed by chart review using explicit criteria. RESULTS: Of the 1,696 study participants, 852 (50%) presented with nonurgent complaints. In logistic regression analyses, absence of a relationship with a regular physician was an independent correlate of presentation for a nonurgent emergency department visit (odds ratio 1.6; 95% confidence interval 1.2, 2.2) when controlling for age, gender, marital status, health status, and comorbid diseases. Race, lack of insurance, and education were not associated with nonurgent use. CONCLUSIONS: Absence of a relationship with a regular doctor was correlated with use of the emergency department for selected nonurgent conditions when controlling for important potential confounders. Our study suggests that maintaining a relationship with a regular physician may reduce nonurgent use of the emergency department regardless of insurance status or health status.

Asking residents about adverse events in a computer dialogue: how accurate are they?

BACKGROUND: Although retrospective identification of adverse events is time-consuming, whether they are present and/or expected is often readily apparent to providers during the provision of care. METHODS: A computer program to flag admissions with possible adverse events was developed. Readmissions to the hospital within 31 days and admissions including more than one visit to the operating room (OR) were flagged. For surgical site infections, all admissions--including a visit to the OR--were flagged, but only a sample was evaluated in the reliability assessment. Residents in an urban, tertiary care hospital were questioned when inputting computerized discharge orders regarding adverse events among 391 cases sampled from 6,813 admissions for a two-month period. RESULTS: For the 228 readmissions (3.3% of all admissions) identified by the computer program, resident responses had a sensitivity of 57% and a specificity of 73% in detecting an unexpected readmission (nurse responses, 96% and 91%). For the 79 patients with a return to the OR, the residents' responses had a sensitivity of 86% and a specificity of 84% for detecting an unexpected return (versus 75% and 98% for the nurses' responses). For the 209 patients with an OR visit, the sensitivity and specificity for a surgical site infection were 85% and 98% for the residents and 54% and 99% for the nurses. DISCUSSION: Information systems can be used to screen for adverse events and to ask providers whether adverse events are unexpected, although the reliability of this approach is likely to vary by event type.

Insurance or a regular physician: which is the most powerful predictor of health care?

OBJECTIVES: This study compared the relative effects on access to health care of relationship with a regular physician and insurance status. METHODS: The subjects were 1952 nonretired, non-Medicare patients aged 18 to 64 years who presented with 1 of 6 chief complaints to 5 academic hospital emergency departments in Boston and Cambridge, Mass, during a 1-month study period in 1995. Access to care was evaluated by 3 measures: delay in seeking care for the current complaint, no physician visit in the previous year, and no emergency department visit in the previous year. RESULTS: After clinical and socioeconomic characteristics were controlled, lacking a regular physician was a stronger, more consistent predictor than insurance status of delay in seeking care (odds ratio [OR] = 1.6, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.2, 2.1), no physician visit [OR] = 4.5%, 95% CI = 3.3, 6.1), and no emergency department visit (OR = 1.8, 95% CI = 1.4, 2.4). For patients with a regular physician, access was no different between the uninsured and the privately insured. For privately insured patients, those with no regular physician had worse access than those with a regular physician. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients presenting to emergency departments, relationship with a regular physician is a stronger predictor than insurance status of access to care.

The effect of change of health insurance on access to care.

This study examines how changes in health insurance status affect patients and their care. Results show that, controlling for socioeconomic factors, condition, age, and urgency, patients who lost insurance and patients who changed insurance were more likely to delay seeking care within the four months after visiting an emergency department than people whose health insurance status did not change. Patients who lost coverage were more likely to report no primary care provider and were less likely to have recommended follow-up care within the four-month period. Loss of insurance also was associated with lower likelihood of vaccine use and check-ups in the prior year. The study confirms that a loss or change in health insurance in the prior year has a measurable effect on access to health care. The greatest impact was among patients who lost insurance, though patients who changed health plans also were more likely to delay seeking care than patients whose health insurance status did not change.

Patient-specific predictors of ambulance use.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: To determine patient-specific socioeconomic and health status characteristics for patients arriving by ambulance at an emergency department. METHODS: Ambulance use among adult ED patients presenting with abdominal pain, chest pain, head trauma, or shortness of breath was studied at five urban teaching hospitals in the north-eastern United States. Cross-sectional analysis within a prospective cohort study of 4,979 consecutive patients was performed using an interval sequence subset of 2,315 patients (84% of those eligible) to whom questionnaires were administered. Ambulance use (21% of surveyed patients; 26% of all patients) was analyzed with logistic regression. RESULTS: Predictors of ambulance use included age greater than 65 years (odds ratio [OR], 1.95; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.34 to 2.82); clinical severity (OR, 3.11; 95% CI, 2.27 to 4.25); poverty (OR, 1.40; 95% CI, 1.08 to 1.83); physical function (OR, 1.05; 95% CI, 1.02 to 1.09 for each point of worsening function on a 12-point physical function scale); and various types of health insurance coverage. Race, sex, education, Medicaid coverage, frequency of ED use, living arrangements, and primary physician availability were not predictive in multivariate analysis of surveyed patients. CONCLUSION: Ambulance use varies by age, clinical severity, income, patient-specific characteristics of physical function, and type of health insurance. Medicaid coverage and frequent ED use are not predictive of increased ambulance use.

Relation between negligent adverse events and the outcomes of medical-malpractice litigation.

BACKGROUND: We have previously shown that in New York State the initiation of malpractice suits correlates poorly with the actual occurrence of adverse events (injuries resulting from medical treatment) and negligence. There is little information on the outcome of such lawsuits, however. To assess the ability of malpractice litigation to make accurate determinations, we studied 51 malpractice suits to identify factors that predict payment to plaintiffs. METHODS: Among malpractice claims that we reviewed independently in an earlier study, we identified 51 litigated claims and followed them over a 10-year period to determine whether the malpractice insurer had closed the case. We obtained detailed summaries of the cases from the insurers and reviewed the litigation files if the outcome of a case differed from the outcome predicted in our original review. RESULTS: Of the 51 malpractice cases, 46 had been closed as of December 31, 1995. Among these cases, 10 of 24 that we originally identified as involving no adverse event were settled for the plaintiffs (mean payment, $28,760), as were 6 of 13 cases classified as involving adverse events but no negligence (mean payment, $98,192) and 5 of 9 cases in which adverse events due to negligence were found in our assessment (mean payment, $66,944). Seven of eight claims involving permanent disability were settled for the plaintiffs (mean payment, $201,250). In a multivariate analysis, disability (permanent vs. temporary or none) was the only significant predictor of payment (P=0.03). There was no association between the occurrence of an adverse event due to negligence (P = 0.32) or an adverse event of any type (P=0.79) and payment. CONCLUSIONS: Among the malpractice claims we studied, the severity of the patient's disability, not the occurrence of an adverse event or an adverse event due to negligence, was predictive of payment to the plaintiff.

Patient noncompliance with medical advice after the emergency department visit.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: To determine the correlates of compliance with follow-up appointments and prescription filling after an emergency department visit. METHODS: This prospective cohort study was undertaken as part of the Emergency Department Quality Study evaluation of five urban teaching hospital EDs in the northeastern United States. Of 2,757 eligible patients who presented with abdominal pain, asthma, chest pain, hand lacerations, head trauma, or first-trimester vaginal bleeding and were enrolled during 1-month period, 2,315 (84%) completed on-site baseline questionnaires. Information about diagnoses, socioeconomic status, discharge instructions, insurance status, and primary care was obtained from the on-site patient surveys and from reviews of medical records. A 76% random sample of patients who completed the questionnaire was generated, and 1,386 patients (79% of the sample) were interviewed by telephone approximately 10 days after their ED visit to determine compliance with follow-up appointments and prescription filling. RESULTS: Of the 1,386 patients interviewed at 10 days, 914 (66%) had been discharged from the ED, and 408 (45%) of those discharged recalled being advised to take a medication. Fifty of these patients (12%) reported that they did not obtain the medication. Significant independent correlates of not filling prescriptions were lack of insurance (odds ratio [OR], 2.4; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.1 to 5.5) and dissatisfaction with discharge instructions (OR, 2.8; 95% CI, 1.2 to 6.4). Two hundred thirty-five (26%) of the discharged patients said they were given follow-up appointments and did not have an appointment pending at the time of the interview; 77 (33%) of these patients reported having missed their appointment. The only significant independent correlate of missing follow-up appointments was being given a telephone number to call instead of leaving the ED with an appointment scheduled (OR, 3.8; 95% CI, 1.7 to 8.8). CONCLUSION: Not having an appointment made before leaving the ED was an independent correlate of missing follow-up appointments. Lack of insurance and dissatisfaction with discharge instructions were independent correlates of not filling prescriptions.

Diagnosis-based risk adjustment for Medicare capitation payments.

Using 1991-92 data for a 5-percent Medicare sample, we develop, estimate, and evaluate risk-adjustment models that utilize diagnostic information from both inpatient and ambulatory claims to adjust payments for aged and disabled Medicare enrollees. Hierarchical coexisting conditions (HCC) models achieve greater explanatory power than diagnostic cost group (DCG) models by taking account of multiple coexisting medical conditions. Prospective models predict average costs of individuals with chronic conditions nearly as well as concurrent models. All models predict medical costs far more accurately than the current health maintenance organization (HMO) payment formula.