Práticas de avaliação na gestão da Atenção Básica à Saúde / Evaluation practices in Primary Health Care management

Resumo Neste estudo, investigamos efeitos das práticas de avaliação na Atenção Básica à Saúde no município de Belo Horizonte, na perspectiva de gestores de diversos níveis. É uma pesquisa qualitativa, de caráter descritivo. O foco deste artigo foi a análise do uso de dois instrumentos de avaliação, o Programa Nacional de Melhoria do Acesso e da Qualidade da Atenção Básica (PMAQ-AB) e o Gestão do Cuidado no Território (GCT), de abrangência municipal. As análises apontaram uma tendência dos entrevistados em realçar mais os aspectos positivos dos instrumentos de avaliação estudados, já que servem prioritariamente aos processos de gestão. Além disso, mostraram as diferenças entre os dois instrumentos, tanto em natureza quanto em efeitos. O PMAQ-AB recebeu críticas específicas de problemas identificados em sua operacionalização. Por sua vez, o grau de sucesso da GCT depende do nível de engajamento e participação dos atores locais.

Abstract In this study, we investigate the effects of assessment practices in Primary Health Care in the city of Belo Horizonte, from the perspective of managers at different levels. It is a qualitative, descriptive research. The focus of this article was the analysis of the use of two assessment instruments, the National Program for Improving Access and Quality of Primary Care (PMAQ-AB) and the Management of Care in the Territory (GCT), with municipal coverage. The analyzes indicated a tendency of the interviewees to emphasize more the positive aspects of the studied assessment instruments, as they primarily serve the management processes. Furthermore, they showed the differences between the two instruments, both in nature and in effects. The PMAQ-AB received specific criticisms of problems identified in its operation. In turn, the degree of success of the GCT depends on the level of engagement and participation of local actors.

SMaRT Assessment Tool: An Innovative Approach for Objective Assessment of Flap Designs.

SUMMARY: The teaching and assessment of ideal surgical markings for local flaps required for optimal aesthetic and functional outcomes remain a challenge in the present era of competency-based surgical education. The authors utilized the bilobed flap for nasal reconstruction as a proof of concept for the development of an innovative objective assessment tool based on statistical shape analysis, with a focus on providing automated, evidence-based, objective, specific, and practical feedback to the learner. The proposed tool is based on Procrustes statistical shape analysis, previously used for the assessment of facial asymmetry in plastic surgery. For performance boundary testing, a series of optimal and suboptimal designs generated in deliberate violation of the established ideals of optimal bilobed flap design were evaluated, and a four-component feedback score of Scale, Mismatch, Rotation, and Translation (SMaRT) was generated. The SMaRT assessment tool demonstrated the capacity to proportionally score a spectrum of designs (n = 36) ranging from subtle to significant variations of optimal, with excellent computational and clinically reasonable performance boundaries. In terms of shape mismatch, changes in SMaRT score also correlated with intended violations in designs away from the ideal flap design. This innovative educational approach could aid in incorporating objective feedback in simulation-based platforms in order to facilitate deliberate practice in flap design, with the potential for adoption in other fields of plastic surgery to automate assessment processes.

Employing computational linguistics techniques to identify limited patient health literacy: Findings from the ECLIPPSE study.

OBJECTIVE: To develop novel, scalable, and valid literacy profiles for identifying limited health literacy patients by harnessing natural language processing. DATA SOURCE: With respect to the linguistic content, we analyzed 283 216 secure messages sent by 6941 diabetes patients to physicians within an integrated system's electronic portal. Sociodemographic, clinical, and utilization data were obtained via questionnaire and electronic health records. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective study used natural language processing and machine learning to generate five unique "Literacy Profiles" by employing various sets of linguistic indices: Flesch-Kincaid (LP_FK); basic indices of writing complexity, including lexical diversity (LP_LD) and writing quality (LP_WQ); and advanced indices related to syntactic complexity, lexical sophistication, and diversity, modeled from self-reported (LP_SR), and expert-rated (LP_Exp) health literacy. We first determined the performance of each literacy profile relative to self-reported and expert-rated health literacy to discriminate between high and low health literacy and then assessed Literacy Profiles' relationships with known correlates of health literacy, such as patient sociodemographics and a range of health-related outcomes, including ratings of physician communication, medication adherence, diabetes control, comorbidities, and utilization. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: LP_SR and LP_Exp performed best in discriminating between high and low self-reported (C-statistics: 0.86 and 0.58, respectively) and expert-rated health literacy (C-statistics: 0.71 and 0.87, respectively) and were significantly associated with educational attainment, race/ethnicity, Consumer Assessment of Provider and Systems (CAHPS) scores, adherence, glycemia, comorbidities, and emergency department visits. CONCLUSIONS: Since health literacy is a potentially remediable explanatory factor in health care disparities, the development of automated health literacy indicators represents a significant accomplishment with broad clinical and population health applications. Health systems could apply literacy profiles to efficiently determine whether quality of care and outcomes vary by patient health literacy; identify at-risk populations for targeting tailored health communications and self-management support interventions; and inform clinicians to promote improvements in individual-level care.

Family-centeredness of services for young children with Down syndrome: an observational study from Turkey

Background/aim: Physicians require information on the family centeredness of services for children with Down syndrome, one of the most frequently encountered disabilities in childhood. We aimed to determine the family-centeredness of services for young children with Down syndrome and using a bioecological theory framework we hypothesized that child, family and service-related factors would be associated with such services. Materials and methods: In a crosssectional design, children with Down syndrome seen at Ankara University Developmental Pediatrics Division (AUDPD) between February 2020 and June 2020 were included if they had received services in the community for at least 12 months. Mothers responded to the measure of process of care-20 (MPOC-20) used to measure family centeredness. Results: All 65 eligible children were included; 57% were boys and median age was 25.0 (IQR: 18.5­38.0) months. The MPOC-20 subscale scores were highest for the "respectful and supportive care (RSC)" (median 6.0; IQR: 4.8­6.8) and lowest for the "providing specific information" (median 3.0; IQR: 4.4­6.5) subscales. On univariate analyses, maternal education

When dispatcher assistance is not saving lives: assessment of process compliance, barriers and outcomes in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest in a metropolitan city in China.

BACKGROUND: Several Chinese cities have implemented dispatcher-assisted cardiopulmonary resuscitation (DA-CPR), although out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) survival rates remain low. We aimed to assess the process compliance, barriers and outcomes of OHCA in one of the earliest implemented (DA-CPR) programmes in China. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed OHCA emergency dispatch records of Suzhou emergency medical service from 2014 to 2015 and included adult OHCA victims (>18 years) with a bystander-witnessed atraumatic OHCA that was subsequently confirmed by on-site emergency physician. The circumstances and DA-CPR process related to the OHCA event were analysed. Dispatch audio records were reviewed to identify potential barriers to implementation during the DA-CPR process. RESULTS: Of the 151 OHCA victims, none survived. The median time from patient collapse to call for emergency services and that from call to provision of cardiopulmonary resuscitation instructions was 30 (IQR 20-60) min and 115 (IQR 90-153) s, respectively. Only 110 (80.3%) bystanders/rescuers followed the dispatcher instructions; of these, 51 (46.3%) undertook persistent chest compressions. Major barriers to following the DA-CPR instructions were present in 104 (68.9%) cases, including caller disconnection of the call, distraught mood or refusal to carry out either compressions or ventilations. CONCLUSIONS: The OHCA survival rate and the DA-CPR process were far from optimal. The zero survival rate is disproportionally low compared with survival statistics in high-income countries. The prolonged delay in calling the emergency services negated and rendered futile any DA-CPR efforts. Thus, efforts targeted at developing public awareness of OHCA, calling for help and competency in DA-CPR should be increased.

Assessing the scalability of innovations in primary care: a cross-sectional study.

BACKGROUND: Canadian health funding currently prioritizes scaling up for evidence-based primary care innovations, but not all teams prepare for scaling up. We explored scalability assessment among primary care innovators in the province of Quebec to evaluate their preparedness for scaling up. METHODS: We performed a cross-sectional survey from Feb. 18 to Mar. 18, 2019. Eligible participants were 33 innovation teams selected for the 2019 Quebec College of Family Physicians' Symposium on Innovations. We conducted a Web-based survey in 2 sections: innovation characteristics and the Innovation Scalability Self-administered Questionnaire. The latter includes 16 criteria (scalability components) grouped into 5 dimensions: theory (1 criterion), impact (6 criteria), coverage (4 criteria), setting (3 criteria) and cost (2 criteria). We classified innovation types using the International Classification of Health Interventions. We performed a descriptive analysis using frequency counts and percentages. RESULTS: Out of 33 teams, 24 participated (72.7%), with 1 innovation each. The types of innovation were management (15/24), prevention (8/24) and therapeutic (1/24). Most management innovations focused on patient navigation (9/15). In order of frequency, teams had assessed theory (79.2%) and impact (79.2%) criteria, followed by cost (77.1%), setting (59.7%) and coverage (54.2%). Most innovations (16/24) had assessed 10 criteria or more, including 10 management innovations, 5 prevention innovations and 1 therapeutic innovation. Implementation fidelity was the least assessed criterion (6/24). INTERPRETATION: The scalability assessments of a primary care innovation varied according to its type. Management innovations, which were the most prevalent and assessed the most scalability components, appear to be most prepared for primary care scale-up in Canada.

The Intervention Scalability Assessment Tool: a pilot study assessing five interventions for scalability.

OBJECTIVES: This study tested the utility of the Intervention Scalability Assessment Tool (ISAT) with real-world interventions considered for scale-up in the Australian context. We explored user perceptions of the usefulness of the ISAT in making scalability decisions and conducted an analysis of completed ISATs. Type of program/service: The ISAT was designed to assist policy makers/practitioners to make structured and reflective assessments of the potential scalability of their interventions. METHODS: Participants (n = 26) were invited via email and needed to be considering a population intervention for scale-up, to be able to pilot the ISAT, and to be willing to complete an online survey to provide feedback. Survey data and completed ISATs were collated and common responses were identified, with exceptions noted. RESULTS: Thirteen participants accepted the invitation to pilot the ISAT; six completed ISATs and returned surveys and five of each were included in the final analysis. The process by which participants completed the ISAT varied, some involving up to six stakeholders in the process and others only one. The time taken to complete the ISAT ranged from 2 hours to 3 days. Interventions considered for scalability were public health interventions and all but one involved a potential statewide scale-up. In terms of outcome, scalability scores across interventions varied, however, all but one intervention was recommended for scale-up. The remaining intervention was deemed to be promising but further information was required before assessing scalability. LESSONS LEARNT: The ISAT was perceived as a useful tool to assess the scalability of real-world health programs, with participants noting only minor limitations and challenges. The ISAT can be applied to a variety of population health interventions and identifies strengths and weaknesses in the evidence base for scale-up. This study revealed that decisions to scale up are often made despite potential weaknesses highlighted through the ISAT. This is likely a reflection of the critically influential role of contextual factors in decisions to scale up, whereby decision makers may balance a variety of considerations, of which evidence of scalability is only one factor.

Population segments as a tool for health care performance reporting: an exploratory study in the Canadian province of British Columbia.

BACKGROUND: Primary care serves all age groups and individuals with health states ranging from those with no chronic conditions to those who are medically complex, or frail and approaching the end of life. For information to be actionable and guide planning, there must be some population disaggregation based on differences in expected needs for care. Promising approaches to segmentation in primary care reflect both the breadth and severity of health states, the types and amounts of health care utilization that are expected, and the roles of the primary care provider. The purpose of this study was to assess population segmentation as a tool to create distinct patient groups for use in primary care performance reporting. METHODS: This cross-sectional study used administrative data (patient characteristics, physician and hospital billings, prescription medicines data, emergency department visits) to classify the population of British Columbia (BC), Canada into one of four population segments: low need, multiple morbidities, medically complex, and frail. Each segment was further classified using socioeconomic status (SES) as a proxy for patient vulnerability. Regression analyses were used to examine predictors of health care use, costs and selected measures of primary care attributes (access, continuity, coordination) by segment. RESULTS: Average annual health care costs increased from the low need ($ 1460) to frail segment ($10,798). Differences in primary care cost by segment only emerged when attributes of primary care were included in regression models: accessing primary care outside business hours and discontinuous primary care (≥5 different GP's in a given year) were associated with higher health care costs across all segments and higher continuity of care was associated with lower costs in the frail segment (cost ratio = 0.61). Additionally, low SES was associated with higher costs across all segments, but the difference was largest in the medically complex group (cost ratio = 1.11). CONCLUSIONS: Population segments based on expected need for care can support primary care measurement and reporting by identifying nuances which may be lost when all patients are grouped together. Our findings demonstrate that variables such as SES and use of regression analyses can further enhance the usefulness of segments for performance measurement and reporting.

FACT: a randomised controlled trial to assess the feasibility of QbTest in the assessment process of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) for young people in prison-a feasibility trial protocol.

INTRODUCTION: The prevalence of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) within the Children and Young People Secure Estate (CYPSE) is much higher than seen in the general population. To make a diagnosis of ADHD, clinicians draw on information from multiple sources, including parents and teachers. However, obtaining these is particularly difficult for young people in the secure estate. There is increasing evidence in the community that QbTest is able to assist in the accurate and earlier diagnosis of ADHD. The objective of this study is to assess the feasibility and acceptability of QbTest in the assessment of ADHD within the CYPSE. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: A single-centre parallel group feasibility randomised controlled trial will be conducted. Sixty young people within the CYPSE identified as displaying possible symptoms of ADHD will be randomised to the intervention arm (n=30; QbTest plus usual care) or control arm (n=30; usual care). Primary analyses will be descriptive and a process evaluation will be conducted to assess the contexts involved in implementing the intervention. Interviews will be conducted to explore acceptability and thematic analysis will be used to analyse the data. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This study was approved by National Health Service Wales research ethics committee 3 (18/WA/0347) on 15 February 2019. The findings will be published in peer-reviewed journals, presented at relevant conferences and disseminated to the public via summaries cocreated with our patient and public involvement group. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN17402196.

Establishment of a Medication Acuity Scoring Tool at a Tertiary Pediatric Teaching Hospital: A 2-Phase Process.

BACKGROUND: Currently, there is no validated objective rating system to address the acuity of medication orders that pharmacists review. OBJECTIVE: The objective was to assess the acuity of a given medication through creating and validating an acuity scoring tool. METHODS: Phase I included the development of the medication acuity scoring tool (MAST) from national safety standards and clinical experience. A survey was administered to pharmacists nationwide to establish a consensus on the individual components of the tool and their associated weighted scores. Phase II was designed to assess MAST's predictive validity by comparing a medication acuity rating generated by MAST to a rating assigned based upon clinical experience of experts. Additionally, in phase II, interrater and intrarater reliability of MAST was evaluated. RESULTS: In phase I, most of MAST's components and their associated scores achieved >75% agreement for inclusion in the final tool. In phase II, without MAST, approximately 50% of pharmacist-assigned acuity ratings were statistically consistent with tool-generated acuity ratings, and there was fair agreement between respondents (k=0.31). With the use of MAST, agreement in acuity ratings improved to substantial (k=0.69), and intrarater reliability was almost perfect (k=0.88). CONCLUSION: MAST is a validated rating system that captures the acuity of medications.

The System for Patient Assessment of Cancer Experiences (SPACE): a cross-sectional study examining feasibility and acceptability.

BACKGROUND: Continuous quality improvement in cancer care relies on the collection of accurate data on the quality of care provided. It is suggested that such an approach should: (i) measure the patient's care experience throughout the cancer trajectory; (ii) use items and response scales that measure concrete and specific aspects of care; (iii) minimise recall bias; (iv) minimise the burden placed on patients for providing data; (v) minimise administrative burden; and (vi) collect actionable data. The System for Patient Assessment of Cancer Experiences (SPACE) was developed to meet these objectives. This study describes the feasibility and acceptability of the SPACE in a sample of oncology outpatients. METHODS: The SPACE was examined in four medical oncology centres. Adult patients were approached by a research assistant prior to their scheduled consultation. Consenting participants completed the SPACE on a computer tablet. Items were tailored to the patient's cancer treatment phase. RESULTS: Of the eligible participants, 1143 consented (83%) and 1056 completed the survey (92%). The average time taken to complete the survey was 6 min 28 s. A large proportion of the sample indicated that the survey was acceptable (88-93% across three acceptability items). CONCLUSION: This study demonstrates that the SPACE can be feasibly administered each time a patient comes to the oncology unit and is acceptable to patients. The SPACE could be used to quantify the care experiences which patients receive during their cancer care. The resulting data could be used to set benchmarks and improve the performance of cancer clinics.

Validating the New Primary Care Measure in the Medical Expenditure Panel Survey.

BACKGROUND: The advancement of primary care research requires reliable and validated measures that capture primary care processes embedded within nationally representative datasets. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to assess the validity of a newly developed measure of primary care processes [Medical Expenditure Panel Survey (MEPS)-PC] with preliminary evidence of moderate to excellent reliability. STUDY DESIGN: A retrospective cohort study of community-dwelling adults with history of office-based provider visit/s using the MEPS (2013-2014). METHODS: The 3 MEPS-PC subscales (Relationship, Comprehensiveness, and Health Promotion) were tested for construct validity against known measures of primary care: Usual Source of Care, Known Provider, and Family-Usual Source of Care. Concurrent and predictive logistic regression analyses were calculated and compared with a priori hypotheses for direction and strength of association. RESULTS: For concurrent validity, all odds ratio estimates conformed with hypotheses, with 91% displaying statistical significance. For predictive validity, all estimates were in the direction of hypotheses, with 92% displaying statistically significant results. Although Relationship and Health Promotion subscales conformed uniformly with hypotheses, the Comprehensiveness subscale yielded significant results in 60% of bivariate odds ratio estimates (P<0.05). CONCLUSION: The MEPS-PC composite measures display modest to strong preliminary evidence of concurrent and predictive validity relative to known indicators of primary care. IMPLICATIONS FOR POLICY AND PRACTICE: The MEPS-PC composite measures display preliminary evidence of concurrent and predictive construct validity, and it may be useful to researchers investigating primary care processes and complexities in the health care environment.

Evaluating the implementation of collaborative teams in community family practice using the Primary Care Assessment Tool.

OBJECTIVE: To examine patients' perceptions of care outcomes following the introduction of collaborative teams into community family practices. DESIGN: Cross-sectional, longitudinal study comprising 4 patient telephone surveys between 2007 and 2016, using random sampling of telephone records based on postal codes. SETTING: Ten WestView Primary Care Network (WPCN) clinics in Alberta, serving a suburban-rural population of approximately 89 000 and an aggregate clinic panel of 61 611 (in 2016). PARTICIPANTS: Adults aged 18 and older with a visit to a family physician in a WPCN clinic at least once in the previous 18 months. INTERVENTIONS: In 2006, WPCN implemented a decentralized and distributed collaborative team model, integrating nonphysician health care professionals into member clinics. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The Primary Care Assessment Tool (PCAT) was used to evaluate standardized primary care delivery domains. Between-year changes were compared using ANOVA (analysis of variance). Clinic-level subgroup analyses were performed. RESULTS: The number of completed surveys included 896 in 2007, 904 in 2010, 1000 in 2013, and 1800 in 2016, reaching 90% to 100% of the targeted sample size. In aggregate, the WPCN PCAT summary score and the scores of 4 core and 2 ancillary domains of primary care exceeded the quality threshold of 3.0: extent of affiliation, ongoing care, first-contact utilization, coordination of care, family-centredness, and cultural competence. The first-contact access domain significantly improved from 2007 to 2016 (P < .001). The domains extent of affiliation, first-contact utilization, and coordination of information systems were unchanged. Ongoing care, coordination of care, comprehensiveness, family-centredness, community orientation, and cultural competence decreased. Except for in 2010, the 2 highest scoring clinics were non-participating solo practices; the lowest-scoring clinic was the one with the largest number of physicians. Across survey years, the PCAT summary score increased statistically significantly for 1 solo practice, remained consistent at an above-quality threshold for another, but decreased for all multi-physician clinics. Unattached patients (ie, those without a family doctor) scored the lowest. CONCLUSION: This study found that WPCN provides high-quality primary care overall, but that patient-perceived outcomes do not indicate global improvement concurrent with team-based initiatives. Decreased standardization of the distributed model likely influenced study-observed variations in clinic performance. Future research should identify clinic and team characteristics that benefit most from team-based care and factors that explain solo practices outperforming models of team-based care.

Variation in responsiveness to warranted behaviour change among NHS clinicians: novel implementation of change detection methods in longitudinal prescribing data.

OBJECTIVES: To determine how clinicians vary in their response to new guidance on existing or new interventions, by measuring the timing and magnitude of change at healthcare institutions. DESIGN: Automated change detection in longitudinal prescribing data. SETTING: Prescribing data in English primary care. PARTICIPANTS: English general practices. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: In each practice the following were measured: the timing of the largest changes, steepness of the change slope (change in proportion per month), and magnitude of the change for two example time series (expiry of the Cerazette patent in 2012, leading to cheaper generic desogestrel alternatives becoming available; and a change in antibiotic prescribing guidelines after 2014, favouring nitrofurantoin over trimethoprim for uncomplicated urinary tract infection (UTI)). RESULTS: Substantial heterogeneity was found between institutions in both timing and steepness of change. The range of time delay before a change was implemented was large (interquartile range 2-14 months (median 8) for Cerazette, and 5-29 months (18) for UTI). Substantial heterogeneity was also seen in slope following a detected change (interquartile range 2-28% absolute reduction per month (median 9%) for Cerazette, and 1-8% (2%) for UTI). When changes were implemented, the magnitude of change showed substantially less heterogeneity (interquartile range 44-85% (median 66%) for Cerazette and 28-47% (38%) for UTI). CONCLUSIONS: Substantial variation was observed in the speed with which individual NHS general practices responded to warranted changes in clinical practice. Changes in prescribing behaviour were detected automatically and robustly. Detection of structural breaks using indicator saturation methods opens up new opportunities to improve patient care through audit and feedback by moving away from cross sectional analyses, and automatically identifying institutions that respond rapidly, or slowly, to warranted changes in clinical practice.

Measuring implementation: development of the implementation process assessment tool (IPAT).

BACKGROUND: Implementation science comprises a large set of theories suggesting interacting factors at different organisational levels. Development of literature syntheses and frameworks for implementation have contributed to comprehensive descriptions of implementation. However, corresponding instruments for measuring these comprehensive descriptions are currently lacking. The present study aimed to develop an instrument measuring care providers' perceptions of an implementation effort, and to explore the instrument's psychometric properties. METHODS: Based on existing implementation literature, a questionnaire was designed with items on individual and team factors and on stages of change in an implementation process. The instrument was tested in a Norwegian study on implementation of evidence based practices for psychosis. Item analysis, factor structure, and internal consistency at baseline were examined. RESULTS: The 27-item Implementation Process Assessment Tool (IPAT) revealed large variation between mean score of the items. The total scale scores were widely dispersed across respondents. Internal consistency for the total scale was high (Cronbach's alpha: .962), and all but one item contributed positively to the construct. The results indicated four underlying constructs: individual stages for behavioural change, individual activities and perceived support, collective readiness and support, and individual perceptions of the intervention. CONCLUSIONS: The IPAT appears to be a feasible instrument for investigating the implementation process from the perspective of those making the change. It can enable examination of the relative importance of factors thought to be essential for implementation outcomes. It may also provide ongoing feedback for leaders tailoring support for teams to improve implementation. However, further research is needed to detect the instrument's properties later in the implementation process and in different contexts. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov code NCT03271242 (retrospective registered September 5, 2017).

Recommended quality measures for health-system pharmacy: 2019 update from the Pharmacy Accountability Measures Work Group.

PURPOSE: Pharmacists are accountable for medication-related services provided to patients. As payment models transition from reimbursement for volume to reimbursement for value, pharmacy departments must demonstrate improvements in patient care outcomes and quality measure performance. The transition begins with an awareness of quality measures for which pharmacists and pharmacy personnel can demonstrate accountability across the continuum of care. The objective of the Pharmacy Accountability Measures (PAM) Work Group is to identify measures for which pharmacy departments can and should assume accountability. SUMMARY: The National Quality Forum (NQF) Quality Positioning System (QPS) was queried for NQF-endorsed medication-related measures. Included measures were curated into a data set of 6 therapeutic categories: antithrombotic safety, cardiovascular control, glucose control, pain management, behavioral health, and antimicrobial stewardship. Subject matter expert (SME) panels assigned to each area analyzed each measure according to a predetermined ranking system developed by the PAM Work Group. Measures remaining after SME review were disseminated during a public comment period for review and ballot. Over 1,000 measures are captured in the NQF QPS; 656 of the measures were found to be endorsed and medication use related or impacted by medication management services. A single reviewer categorized 140 measures into therapeutic categories for SME review; the remaining measures were unrelated to those clinical domains. The SME groups identified 28 measures for inclusion. CONCLUSION: An understanding of the endorsed quality measures available for public reporting programs provides an opportunity for pharmacists to demonstrate accountability for performance, thus improving quality and safety and demonstrating value of care provided.

Development and validation of a medication regimen complexity scoring tool for critically ill patients.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to develop and validate a novel medication regimen complexity-intensive care unit (MRC-ICU) scoring tool in critically ill patients and to correlate MRC with illness severity and patient outcomes. METHODS: This study was a single-center, retrospective observational chart review of adults admitted to the medical ICU (MICU) between November 2016 and June 2017. The primary aim was the development and internal validation of the MRC-ICU scoring tool. Secondary aims included external validation of the MRC-ICU and exploration of relationships between medication regimen complexity and patient outcomes. Exclusion criteria included a length of stay of less than 24 hours in the MICU, active transfer, or hospice orders at 24 hours. A total of 130 patient medication regimens were used to test, modify, and validate the MRC-ICU tool. RESULTS: The 39-line item medication regimen complexity scoring tool was validated both internally and externally. Convergent validity was confirmed with total medications (p < 0.0001). Score discriminant validity was confirmed by lack of association with age (p = 0.1039) or sex (p = 0.7829). The MRC-ICU score was significantly associated with ICU length of stay (p = 0.0166), ICU mortality (p = 0.0193), and patient acuity (p < 0.0001). CONCLUSION: The MRC-ICU scoring tool was validated and found to correlate with length of stay, inpatient mortality, and patient acuity.

Electronic Health Program to Empower Patients in Returning to Normal Activities After Colorectal Surgical Procedures: Mixed-Methods Process Evaluation Alongside a Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: Long-term recovery takes longer than expected despite improved surgical techniques and Enhanced Recovery After Surgery programs. An electronic health (eHealth) care program ("ikherstel") was developed to partially substitute perioperative care for patients undergoing colorectal surgical procedures. Successfully tested eHealth programs are not always implemented in usual care, and it is, therefore, important to evaluate the process to optimize future implementation. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to evaluate whether the eHealth intervention was executed as planned. METHODS: A mixed-methods process evaluation was carried out alongside a multicenter randomized controlled trial (RCT). This evaluation was performed using the Linnan and Steckler framework for the quantitative part of this study, measuring the components reach, dose delivered, dose received, fidelity, and participants' attitudes. Total implementation scores were calculated using the averaging approach, in which the sum of all data points is divided by the number of data points and the total adherence to the protocol is measured. For the qualitative part, the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology framework was used. The quantitative data were based on participants' questionnaires, a logistic database, a weblog, and participants' medical files and were obtained by performing semistructured interviews with participants of the RCT. RESULTS: A total of 151 participants of 340 eligible patients were included in the RCT, of which 73 participants were allocated to the intervention group. On the basis of the quantitative process data, total implementation scores for the website, mobile app, electronic consult, and activity tracker were 64%, 63%, 44%, and 67%, respectively. Participants in the qualitative part experienced the program as supportive and provided guidance on their recovery process after colorectal surgery. Most frequently mentioned barriers were the limited interaction with and feedback from health care professionals and the lack of tailoring of the convalescence plan in case of a different course of recovery. CONCLUSIONS: The intervention needs more interaction with and feedback from health care professionals and needs more tailored guidance in case of different recovery or treatment courses. To ensure a successful implementation of the program in daily practice, some adjustments are required to optimize the program in a blended care form. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Netherlands Trial Registry NTR5686; http://www.trialregister.nl/trialreg/admin/rctview.asp?TC= 5686 (Archieved by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/75LrJaHrr).

The Clavien-Dindo Classification in Pancreatic Surgery: A Clinical and Economic Validation.

Background/Aims: In 2004 P. A. Clavien and D. Dindo published the well-known grading system of postoperative complications. It is established in several surgical disciplines. The aim of this study was to assess its validity in pancreatic surgery. The impact of complication grade on economic resources was investigated as well. Methods: From a prospective database, we retrospectively evaluated all patients who underwent pancreatic resection between January 2009 and December 2014 at our department. 309 patients received pancreatic head resection (pylorus-preserving pancreatoduodenectomy (PPPD) or Kausch-Whipple), total pancreatectomy or left resection. We performed a univariate analysis of the correlation between the Clavien-Dindo classification-grade (CDC-grade) with length of postoperative stay (LOS) and DRG-related (diagnosis related groups) remuneration using Kruskal-Wallis test. Furthermore, we performed a subgroup analysis (chi-square test and Fishers-test) of demographic, clinical, and perioperative data. Results: American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) score (p = 0.0014), operation time (p = 0.0229) and intraoperative blood loss (p = 0.0016) showed significant correlation with CDC-grade. Increasing LOS and DRG-related remuneration correlated significantly with increasing CDC-grade (p < 0.0001). Conclusion: The CDC-grading system shows high correlation to clinical outcome and case-related remuneration in pancreatic surgery. Therefore, it is a valid tool for evaluation and comparison of surgical techniques and surgical centers.

A three-step methodology for process-oriented performance: how to enhance automated data collection in healthcare.

Background. Healthcare managers often attempt to enhance process-oriented performance. However, this remains a challenge. New approaches aimed at increasing the implementation success of process-oriented performance measurement should be investigated. Methods. This study investigates and discusses a step-by-step methodology to implement an automated and effective process-oriented performance measurement system in a hospital. The methodology is based on a framework for developing dashboards based on three steps: the demand side, supply side, and the fit between the two. An illustrative case of the process of hip surgery in the operating room of two hospitals is used. Results. A methodology has been developed to define a reliable set of process-oriented performance metrics, allowing analysis and management of the different flows in healthcare in an integrated way, several methods were investigated to automatically integrate the data gathered into a reporting infrastructure that can be used to disseminate the results. Conclusion. This step-by-step methodology allows healthcare organizations to develop and implement effective process-oriented performance measurement in an automated way. This allows the alignment of the goals of hospital management and various stakeholders with the more analytical analysis of business process management notation and hospital information system (HIS) data.