Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 2 de 2
Filtrar
Más filtros

Bases de datos
País/Región como asunto
Tipo del documento
País de afiliación
Intervalo de año de publicación
1.
Am J Manag Care ; 16(8): 601-6, 2010 Aug.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-20712393

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVES: To examine the association between performance on clinical process measures and intermediate outcomes and the use of chronic care management processes (CMPs), electronic medical record (EMR) capabilities, and participation in external quality improvement (QI) initiatives. STUDY DESIGN: Cross-sectional analysis of linked 2006 clinical performance scores from the Integrated Healthcare Association's pay-for-performance program and survey data from the 2nd National Study of Physician Organizations among 108 California physician organizations (POs). METHODS: Controlling for differences in PO size, organization type (medical group or independent practice association), and Medicaid revenue, we used ordinary least squares regression analysis to examine the association between the use of CMPs, EMR capabilities, and external QI initiatives and performance on the following 3 clinical composite measures: diabetes management, processes of care, and intermediate outcomes (diabetes and cardiovascular). RESULTS: Greater use of CMPs was significantly associated with clinical performance: among POs using more than 5 CMPs, we observed a 3.2-point higher diabetes management score on a performance scale with scores ranging from 0 to 100 (P <.001), while for each 1.0-point increase on the CMP index, we observed a 1.0-point gain in intermediate outcomes (P <.001). Participation in external QI initiatives was positively associated with improved delivery of clinical processes of care: a 1.0-point increase on the QI index translated into a 1.4-point gain in processes-of-care performance (P = .02). No relationship was observed between EMR capabilities and performance. CONCLUSION: Greater investments in CMPs and QI interventions may help POs raise clinical performance and achieve success under performance-based accountability schemes.


Asunto(s)
Competencia Clínica/estadística & datos numéricos , Eficiencia Organizacional/estadística & datos numéricos , Convenios Médico-Hospital/estadística & datos numéricos , Mejoramiento de la Calidad/estadística & datos numéricos , California , Competencia Clínica/normas , Estudios Transversales , Eficiencia , Eficiencia Organizacional/normas , Encuestas de Atención de la Salud , Convenios Médico-Hospital/normas , Humanos , Medicaid/estadística & datos numéricos , Análisis Multivariante , Desarrollo de Programa , Evaluación de Programas y Proyectos de Salud , Mejoramiento de la Calidad/normas , Análisis de Regresión , Factores de Riesgo , Estadística como Asunto , Estados Unidos
2.
Health Aff (Millwood) ; 28(2): 517-25, 2009.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-19276011

RESUMEN

Pay-for-performance (P4P) has been widely adopted, but it remains unclear how providers are responding and whether results are meeting expectations. Physician organizations involved in the California Integrated Healthcare Association's (IHA) P4P program reported having increased physician-level performance feedback and accountability, speeded up information technology adoption, and sharpened their organizational focus and support for improvement in response to P4P; however, after three years of investment, these changes had not translated into breakthrough quality improvements. Continued monitoring is required to determine whether early investments made by physician organizations provide a basis for greater improvements in the future.


Asunto(s)
Eficiencia Organizacional , Registros de Salud Personal , Evaluación de Procesos, Atención de Salud , Humanos
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA