Enhancing board oversight on quality of hospital care: an agency theory perspective.

BACKGROUND: Community hospitals in the United States are almost all governed by a governing board that is legally accountable for the quality of care provided. Increasing pressures for better quality and safety are prompting boards to strengthen their oversight function on quality. PURPOSE: In this study, we aimed to provide an update to prior research by exploring the role and practices of governing boards in quality oversight through the lens of agency theory and comparing hospital quality performance in relation to the adoption of those practices. METHODOLOGY: Data on board practices from a survey conducted by The Governance Institute in 2007 were merged with data on hospital quality drawn from two federal sources that measured processes of care and mortality. The study sample includes 445 public and private not-for-profit hospitals. We used factor analysis to explore the underlying dimensions of board practices. We further compared hospital quality performance by the adoption of each individual board practice. FINDINGS: Consistent with the agency theory, the 13 board practices included in the survey appear to center around enhancing accountability of the board, management, and the medical staff. Reviewing the hospital's quality performance on a regular basis was the most common practice. A number of board practices, not examined in prior research, showed significant association with better performance on process of care and/or risk-adjusted mortality: requiring major new clinical programs to meet quality-related criteria, setting some quality goals at the "theoretical ideal" level, requiring both the board and the medical staff to be as involved as management in setting the agenda for discussion on quality, and requiring the hospital to report its quality/safety performance to the general public. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Hospital governing boards should examine their current practices and consider adopting those that would enhance the accountability of the board itself, management, and the medical staff.

Board oversight of quality: any differences in process of care and mortality?

In response to legal and accreditation mandates as well as pressures from purchasers and consumers for quality improvement, hospital governing boards seek to improve their oversight of quality of care by adopting various practices. Based on a previous survey of hospital presidents/chief executive officers, this study examines differences in hospital quality performance associated with the adoption of particular practices in board oversight of quality. Quality was measured by performance in process of care and risk-adjusted mortality, using the Hospital Compare data from the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services and the Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project inpatient databases of the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. Board practices found to be associated with better performance in both process of care and mortality include (1) having a board quality committee; (2) establishing strategic goals for quality improvement; (3) being involved in setting the quality agenda for the hospital; (4) including a specific item on quality in board meetings; (5) using a dashboard with national benchmarks that includes indicators for clinical quality, patient safety, and patient satisfaction; and (6) linking senior executives' performance evaluation to quality and patient safety indicators. Involvement of physician leadership in the board quality committee further enhanced the hospital's quality performance. Taken together, these findings seem to support the will-execution-constancy of purpose framework on improving the effectiveness of hospital boards in overseeing quality. Future study should examine how specific board practices influence the culture and operations of the hospital that lead to better quality of care.

Board engagement in quality: findings of a survey of hospital and system leaders.

Hospital governing boards assume an important role in improving delivery of quality care in the hospital. More knowledge about the prevalence and impact of particular board activities can help them perform this role more effectively. This study draws from a survey of hospital and system leaders (presidents/chief executive officers [CEOs]) that was conducted in the first six months of 2006 with a total of 562 respondents. The survey contained 27 questions on various aspects of board engagement in quality. More than 80 percent of the responding CEOs indicated that their governing boards establish strategic goals for quality improvement, use quality dashboards to track performance, and follow up on corrective actions related to adverse events. The adoption of other practices was reported less frequently. Only 61 percent of the respondents indicated that their governing boards have a quality committee. The existence of a board quality committee was associated with higher likelihoods of adopting various oversight practices and lower mortality rates for six common medical conditions measured by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality's Inpatient Quality Indicators and the State Inpatient Databases. Hospital governing boards appear to be actively engaged in quality oversight, particularly through use of internal data and national benchmarks to monitor the quality performance of their organizations. Having a board quality committee can significantly enhance the board's oversight function. Other potentially useful activities-such as board involvement in setting the agenda for the discussion on quality, inclusion of the quality measures in the CEO's performance evaluation, and improvement of quality literacy of board members-are currently performed infrequently.