Suchergebnisse

Twenty-seven years after the first public release by the U.S. government of data on the quality of hospital care, public reporting for consumers has expanded substantially. Despite the growth in public reporting activities, there is limited evidence of their use by consumers in ways that significantly affect health care delivery. Support for public reporting continues, in part, because of the face value of transparency. The limited impact of reporting efforts is plausibly due to flaws in the content, design, and implementation of existing public reports rather than inherent limitations of reporting. Substantial work is still needed for public reports to achieve their potential for engaging and informing consumers. We present a vision statement and 10 recommendations to achieve this potential.

Insurers and purchasers of health care in the United States are on the verge of potentially revolutionary changes in the approaches they use to pay for health care. Recently, purchasers and insurers have been experimenting with payment approaches that include incentives to improve quality and reduce the use of unnecessary and costly services. The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010 is likely to accelerate payment reform based on performance measurement. This article provides details of the results of a technical report that catalogues nearly 100 implemented and proposed payment reform programs, classifies each of these programs into one of 11 payment reform models, and identifies the performance measurement needs associated with each model. A synthesis of the results suggests near-term priorities for performance measure development and identifies pertinent challenges related to the use of performance measures as a basis for payment reform. The report is also intended to create a shared framework for analysis of future performance measurement opportunities. This report is intended for the many stakeholders tasked with outlining a national quality strategy in the wake of health care reform legislation.

In 2008, the Massachusetts state legislature mandated an examination of the feasibility of the state's participation in establishing a comparative effectiveness center (CEC) and requested recommendations for the entity's design. "Comparative effectiveness" research involves the direct comparative assessment of the efficacy and cost-effectiveness of health care interventions and strategies. The center's findings would guide purchasing and payment decisions related to medical procedures, devices, drugs, and biologics by public- and private-sector organizations. The state has several options in terms of its approach to comparative effectiveness research. It could establish an interstate CEC that synthesizes existing findings for regional decisionmakers, it could establish an interstate CEC that supports new research, it could join an existing CEC, it could join the Drug Effectiveness Review Project and the Medicare Evidence-Based Decisions Project and also establish a regional center, or it could elect not to establish a CEC at all. An exploration of the options and the types of research that could be sponsored reveals that all of the options are potentially feasible, but the legislature's decision with regard to design must consider the level of prioritization of comparative effectiveness research relative to other approaches to improving health care quality and reducing spending growth.

Most currently available quality measures reflect point-in-time provider tasks, providing a limited and fragmented assessment of care. The concept of episodes of care could be used to develop quality measurement approaches that reflect longer periods of care. With input from clinical experts, we constructed episode-of-care frameworks for six illustrative conditions and identified potential gaps and measure development priority areas. Episode-based measures could assess changes in health outcomes ("delta measures"), the amount of time during an episode in which a patient has suboptimal health status ("integral measures"), quality contingent upon events occurring previously ("contingent measures"), and composites of measures throughout the episode. This article identifies a number of challenges that will need to be addressed to advance operationalization of episode-based quality measurement.

The Veterans Access, Choice, and Accountability Act of 2014 addressed the need for access to timely, high-quality health care for veterans. Section 201 of the legislation called for an independent assessment of various aspects of veterans' health care. The RAND Corporation was tasked with an assessment of the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) current and projected health care capabilities and resources. An examination of data from a variety of sources, along with a survey of VA medical facility leaders, revealed the breadth and depth of VA resources and capabilities: fiscal resources, workforce and human resources, physical infrastructure, interorganizational relationships, and information resources. The assessment identified barriers to the effective use of these resources and capabilities. Analysis of data on access to VA care and the quality of that care showed that almost all veterans live within 40 miles of a VA health facility, but fewer have access to VA specialty care. Veterans usually receive care within 14 days of their desired appointment date, but wait times vary considerably across VA facilities. VA has long played a national leadership role in measuring the quality of health care. The assessment showed that VA health care quality was as good or better on most measures compared with other health systems, but quality performance lagged at some VA facilities. VA will require more resources and capabilities to meet a projected increase in veterans' demand for VA care over the next five years. Options for increasing capacity include accelerated hiring, full nurse practice authority, and expanded use of telehealth.