As hospitals and physicians are held more accountable for healthcare quality, more attention must be paid to the accuracy and reliability of measures used to evaluate caregivers, says Peter J. Pronovost, MD, a professor of anesthesiology and critical care medicine at the Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine in Baltimore.
As the desire to evaluate and improve healthcare intensifies, Dr. Provonost argues there isn't much consensus as to which measures are scientifically valid and accurate assessments of quality. Patients may make decisions based on metrics that poorly reflect the quality of care provided by hospitals. Invalid and inaccurate quality measures may also lead hospitals to overlook deficiencies where quality is judged to be better than it is.
Dr. Pronovost and Richard Lilford, PhD, an epidemiologist at University of Birmingham in England, point to research that compared four different metrics used to determine in-hospital mortality. Forty-three percent of hospitals that showed higher-than-expected mortality by one commercially available metric showed lower-than-expected mortality by another metric.
Drs. Pronovost and Mr. Lilford called for the creation of an independent agency to devise rational and standardized outcome measures similar to the accounting rules the SEC creates for businesses. "The goal is to make the process of determining quality standard and transparent, and make data meaningful for consumers and usable by clinicians, ultimately improving patient outcomes," Dr. Pronovost said.
Read the news release about Dr. Pronovost's thought on quality measures.
Read other coverage about quality measures:
- CMS Releases Hospital-Acquired Conditions Data
- VA Patient Outcomes Data Motivate Change at Hospitals
- Illinois Hospital Report Card Adds Infection Control Data
As the desire to evaluate and improve healthcare intensifies, Dr. Provonost argues there isn't much consensus as to which measures are scientifically valid and accurate assessments of quality. Patients may make decisions based on metrics that poorly reflect the quality of care provided by hospitals. Invalid and inaccurate quality measures may also lead hospitals to overlook deficiencies where quality is judged to be better than it is.
Dr. Pronovost and Richard Lilford, PhD, an epidemiologist at University of Birmingham in England, point to research that compared four different metrics used to determine in-hospital mortality. Forty-three percent of hospitals that showed higher-than-expected mortality by one commercially available metric showed lower-than-expected mortality by another metric.
Drs. Pronovost and Mr. Lilford called for the creation of an independent agency to devise rational and standardized outcome measures similar to the accounting rules the SEC creates for businesses. "The goal is to make the process of determining quality standard and transparent, and make data meaningful for consumers and usable by clinicians, ultimately improving patient outcomes," Dr. Pronovost said.
Read the news release about Dr. Pronovost's thought on quality measures.
Read other coverage about quality measures:
- CMS Releases Hospital-Acquired Conditions Data
- VA Patient Outcomes Data Motivate Change at Hospitals
- Illinois Hospital Report Card Adds Infection Control Data