The Volume and Cost of Quality Metric Reporting.

Importance: US hospitals report data on many health care quality metrics to government and independent health care rating organizations, but the annual cost to acute care hospitals of measuring and reporting quality metric data, independent of resources spent on quality interventions, is not well known. Objective: To evaluate externally reported inpatient quality metrics for adult patients and estimate the cost of data collection and reporting, independent of quality-improvement efforts. Design, Setting, and Participants: Retrospective time-driven activity-based costing study at the Johns Hopkins Hospital (Baltimore, Maryland) with hospital personnel involved in quality metric reporting processes interviewed between January 1, 2019, and June 30, 2019, about quality reporting activities in the 2018 calendar year. Main Outcomes and Measures: Outcomes included the number of metrics, annual person-hours per metric type, and annual personnel cost per metric type. Results: A total of 162 unique metrics were identified, of which 96 (59.3%) were claims-based, 107 (66.0%) were outcome metrics, and 101 (62.3%) were related to patient safety. Preparing and reporting data for these metrics required an estimated 108 478 person-hours, with an estimated personnel cost of $5 038 218.28 (2022 USD) plus an additional $602 730.66 in vendor fees. Claims-based (96 metrics; $37 553.58 per metric per year) and chart-abstracted (26 metrics; $33 871.30 per metric per year) metrics used the most resources per metric, while electronic metrics consumed far less (4 metrics; $1901.58 per metric per year). Conclusions and Relevance: Significant resources are expended exclusively for quality reporting, and some methods of quality assessment are far more expensive than others. Claims-based metrics were unexpectedly found to be the most resource intensive of all metric types. Policy makers should consider reducing the number of metrics and shifting to electronic metrics, when possible, to optimize resources spent in the overall pursuit of higher quality.

Implementing a Health System-wide Patient Blood Management Program with a Clinical Community Approach.

BACKGROUND: Patient blood management programs are gaining popularity as quality improvement and patient safety initiatives, but methods for implementing such programs across multihospital health systems are not well understood. Having recently incorporated a patient blood management program across our health system using a clinical community approach, we describe our methods and results. METHODS: We formed the Johns Hopkins Health System blood management clinical community to reduce transfusion overuse across five hospitals. This physician-led, multidisciplinary, collaborative, quality-improvement team (the clinical community) worked to implement best practices for patient blood management, which we describe in detail. Changes in blood utilization and blood acquisition costs were compared for the pre- and post-patient blood management time periods. RESULTS: Across the health system, multiunit erythrocyte transfusion orders decreased from 39.7 to 20.2% (by 49%; P < 0.0001). The percentage of patients transfused decreased for erythrocytes from 11.3 to 10.4%, for plasma from 2.9 to 2.2%, and for platelets from 3.1 to 2.7%, (P < 0.0001 for all three). The number of units transfused per 1,000 patients decreased for erythrocytes from 455 to 365 (by 19.8%; P < 0.0001), for plasma from 175 to 107 (by 38.9%; P = 0.0002), and for platelets from 167 to 141 (by 15.6%; P = 0.04). Blood acquisition cost savings were $2,120,273/yr, an approximate 400% return on investment for our patient blood management efforts. CONCLUSIONS: Implementing a health system-wide patient blood management program by using a clinical community approach substantially reduced blood utilization and blood acquisition costs.

Improving healthcare value through clinical community and supply chain collaboration.

BACKGROUND: We hypothesized that integrating supply chain with clinical communities would allow for clinician-led supply cost reduction and improved value in an academic health system. METHODS: Three clinical communities (spine, joint, blood management) and one clinical community-like physician led team of surgeon stakeholders partnered with the supply chain team on specific supply cost initiatives. The teams reviewed their specific utilization and cost data, and the physicians led consensus-building conversations over a series of team meetings to agree to standard supply utilization. RESULTS: The spine and joint clinical communities each agreed upon a vendor capping model that led to cost savings of $3 million dollars and $1.5 million dollars respectively. The blood management decreased blood product utilization and achieved $1.2 million dollars savings. $5.6 million dollars in savings was achieved by a clinical community-like group of surgeon stakeholders through standardization of sutures and endomechanicals. CONCLUSIONS: Physician led clinical teams empowered to lead change achieved substantial supply chain cost savings in an academic health system. The model of combining clinical communities with supply chain offers hope for an effective, practical, and scalable approach to improving value and engaging physicians in other academic health systems. IMPLICATIONS: This clinician led model could benefit both private and academic health systems engaging in value optimization efforts. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: N/A.

From Board to Bedside: How the Application of Financial Structures to Safety and Quality Can Drive Accountability in a Large Health Care System.

BACKGROUND: As the health care system in the United States places greater emphasis on the public reporting of quality and safety data and its use to determine payment, provider organizations must implement structures that ensure discipline and rigor regarding these data. An academic health system, as part of a performance management system, applied four key components of a financial reporting structure to support the goal of top-to-bottom accountability for improving quality and safety. FOUR KEY COMPONENTS OF A FINANCIAL REPORTING STRUCTURE: The four components implemented by Johns Hopkins Medicine were governance, accountability, reporting of consolidated quality performance statements, and auditing. Governance is provided by the health system's Patient Safety and Quality Board Committee, which reviews goals and strategy for patient safety and quality, reviews quarterly performance for each entity, and holds organizational leaders accountable for performance. An accountability plan includes escalating levels of review corresponding to the number of months an entity misses the defined performance target for a measure. A consolidated quality statement helps inform the Patient Safety and Quality Board Committee and leadership on key quality and safety issues. An audit evaluates the efficiency and effectiveness of processes for data collection, validation, and storage, as to ensure the accuracy and completeness of quality measure reporting. CONCLUSION: If hospitals and health systems truly want to prioritize improvements in safety and quality, they will need to create a performance management system that ensures data validity and supports performance accountability. Without valid data, it is difficult to know whether a performance gap is due to data quality or clinical quality.

A Model for the Departmental Quality Management Infrastructure Within an Academic Health System.

As quality improvement and patient safety come to play a larger role in health care, academic medical centers and health systems are poised to take a leadership role in addressing these issues. Academic medical centers can leverage their large integrated footprint and have the ability to innovate in this field. However, a robust quality management infrastructure is needed to support these efforts. In this context, quality and safety are often described at the executive level and at the unit level. Yet, the role of individual departments, which are often the dominant functional unit within a hospital, in realizing health system quality and safety goals has not been addressed. Developing a departmental quality management infrastructure is challenging because departments are diverse in composition, size, resources, and needs.In this article, the authors describe the model of departmental quality management infrastructure that has been implemented at the Johns Hopkins Hospital. This model leverages the fractal approach, linking departments horizontally to support peer and organizational learning and connecting departments vertically to support accountability to the hospital, health system, and board of trustees. This model also provides both structure and flexibility to meet individual departmental needs, recognizing that independence and interdependence are needed for large academic medical centers. The authors describe the structure, function, and support system for this model as well as the practical and essential steps for its implementation. They also provide examples of its early success.

Relative impact of a patient blood management program on utilization of all three major blood components.

BACKGROUND: Although patient blood management (PBM) programs clearly reduce transfusion overuse, the relative impact on red blood cell (RBC), plasma, and platelet (PLT) utilization is unclear. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: A retrospective analysis of electronic records was conducted at a medium-sized academic hospital to assess blood utilization for all inpatients admitted during 1-year periods before (n = 20,531) and after (n = 19,477) PBM efforts began in September 2014. Transfusion guideline compliance and overall utilization were assessed for RBCs, plasma, and PLTs. The primary PBM efforts included education on evidence-based transfusion guidelines, decision support in the computerized provider order entry system, and distribution of provider-specific reports showing comparison to peers for guideline compliance. Cost avoidance was determined by two methods (acquisition cost and activity-based cost), and clinical outcomes were compared during the two periods. RESULTS: For RBCs, orders outside hospital guidelines decreased (from 23.9% to 17.1%, p < 0.001), and utilization decreased by 12% (p < 0.035). For plasma and PLTs, both orders outside guidelines and utilization changed minimally. Overall cost avoidance was $181,887/year by acquisition cost (and from $582,039 to $873,058/year by activity-based cost), 93% of which was attributed to reduction in RBC utilization. Length of stay, morbidity, and mortality were unchanged. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings demonstrate a greater opportunity for reducing RBC compared to plasma and PLT utilization. A properly implemented PBM program has potential to reduce unnecessary transfusions and their associated risk and costs, without compromising clinical outcomes.

Initiating an Enhanced Recovery Pathway Program: An Anesthesiology Department's Perspective.

BACKGROUND: Enhanced recovery pathways (ERPs) for surgical patients may reduce variation in care and improve perioperative outcomes. Mainstays of ERPs are standardized perioperative pathways. At The Johns Hopkins Hospital (Baltimore), an integrated ERP was proposed to further reduce the surgical site infection rate and the longer-than-expected hospital length of stay in colorectal surgery patients. METHODS: To develop the technical components of the anesthesia pathway, evidence on enhanced recovery was reviewed and the limitations of the hospital infrastructure and policies were considered. The goals of the perioperative anesthesiology pathway were achieving superior analgesia, minimizing postoperative nausea and vomiting, facilitating patient recovery, and preserving perioperative immune function. ERP was implemented in phases during a 30-day period, starting with the anesthesiology elements and followed by the pre- and postoperative surgical team processes. The perioperative anesthetic regimen was tailored to meet the goal of preservation of perioperative immune function (in an attempt to decrease surgical site infection and cancer recurrence), in part by minimizing perioperative opioid use. RESULTS: After six months of exposure to all ERP elements, a 45% reduction in length of stay was observed among colorectal surgery patients. In addition, patient satisfaction scores for this cohort of patients improved from the 37th percentile preimplementation to >97th percentile postimplementation. CONCLUSIONS: Development of an ERP requires collaboration among surgeons, anesthesiologists, and nurses. Thoughtful, collaborative pathway development and implementation, with recognition of the strengths and weakness of the existing surgical health care delivery system, should lead to realization of early improvement in outcomes.

Building a business case for colorectal surgery quality improvement.

BACKGROUND: Improving surgical quality is a priority, but building a business case for the efforts could be challenging. Bridging the gap between the clinicians and hospital leaders is the first step to align quality and financial priorities within health care. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the financial impact of the surgical comprehensive unit-based safety program on colorectal surgery procedures. DESIGN: This a retrospective cohort study. SETTING: This study was conducted at a university-based tertiary care hospital. PATIENTS: All patients undergoing colectomy or proctectomy between July 2010 and June 2012 were included. INTERVENTION: A comprehensive unit-based safety program focused on colorectal surgical site infection reduction was implemented. Three surgeons participated in the program in year 1, and 5 surgeons participated in year 2. Patients were categorized as participating or nonparticipating based on the surgeon who performed the procedure. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Resource utilization and cost were the main outcome measures. RESULTS: During the 2 years, there were 626 patients who met the selection criteria. Participating surgeons operated on 444 patients (70.9%), and the nonparticipating surgeons operated on 182 patients (29.1%). After adjusting for covariates, the variable direct cost was significantly lower for the participating surgeons in laboratory work by $191 (p = 0.009), operating room utilization by $149 (p = 0.05), and supplies by $615 (p = 0.003). The surgical site infection rates, need for an intensive care unit stay, and length of stay were not significantly different between the 2 groups. LIMITATIONS: The multiple biases related to surgeon self-selection for program participation and surgeon training and clinical skills were not addressed in this study owing to the limitations in sample size and data collection. CONCLUSION: A comprehensive unit-based safety program implementation, including dedicated frontline providers who focused on the standardization of protocols, was able to reduce the variation in resource utilization and costs in comparison with a control group.