Physicians’ participation in the Physicians’ Quality Reporting Initiative and their perceptions of its impact on quality of care

Show Me the Money, I'll Show You My Complications: Impacts of Incentivized Incident Self-Reporting Among Surgeons

INTRODUCTION

Trial and error have the propensity to generate knowledge. Near misses and adverse event reporting can improve patient care. Professional ridicule or litigation risks after an incident may lead to decreased reporting by physicians; however, the lack of incident reporting can negatively affect patient safety and halt scientific advancements. This study compares reporting patterns after distribution of financial incentives to surgeons for self-reporting quality incidents.

METHODS

Retrospective review of an internal incident reporting system, RL6, from September 2018 to September 2019 was performed. Incident reporting patterns after incentive distributions across professional classifications and surgical specialties were evaluated. Engagement surveys on incident reporting were completed by physicians. The primary outcomes were changes in reporting patterns and perceptions after distribution of incentives.

RESULTS

Two hundred and eighteen surgical patients were identified in the incidents reported. Financial incentives significantly increased incidents reported (35 to 183) by physicians (37.1% to 67.8%; P < 0.001) and physician assistants (2.9% to 18.6%; P < 0.001). Acute care surgery displayed the largest increase in incidents reported among surgical specialties (5.7% to 20.2%; P = 0.040). Surgeons exhibited an increase in reporting (60.0% to 94.5%; P < 0.001) compared with witnesses after incentivization (2.9% to 1.6%).

CONCLUSIONS

Financial incentives were associated with increased incident reporting. After the establishment of incentives, physicians were more likely to report their incidents, which may dispel professional embarrassment and display incident ownership. Institutions must encourage reporting while supporting providers. Future quality-improvement studies targeting reporting should incorporate incentives aimed to engage and empower health-care providers.

Primary care physicians' attitudes and perceptions towards antibiotic resistance and outpatient antibiotic stewardship in the USA: a qualitative study

OBJECTIVES

At least 30% of outpatient antibiotic prescriptions are unnecessary. Outpatient antibiotic stewardship is needed to improve prescribing and address the threat of antibiotic resistance. A better understanding of primary care physicians (PCPs) attitudes towards antibiotic prescribing and outpatient antibiotic stewardship is needed to identify barriers to stewardship implementation and help tailor stewardship strategies. The aim of this study was to assess PCPs current attitudes towards antibiotic resistance, inappropriate antibiotic prescribing and the feasibility of outpatient stewardship efforts.

DESIGN

Eight focus groups with PCPs were conducted by an independent moderator using a moderator guide. Focus groups were audio recorded, transcribed and coded for major themes using deductive and inductive content analysis methods.

SETTING

Focus groups were conducted in four US cities: Philadelphia, Birmingham, Chicago and Los Angeles.

PARTICIPANTS

Two focus groups were conducted in each city-one with family medicine and internal medicine physicians and one with paediatricians. A total of 26 family medicine/internal medicine physicians and 26 paediatricians participated.

RESULTS

Participants acknowledged that resistance is an important public health issue, but not as important as other pressing problems (eg, obesity, opioids). Many considered resistance to be more of a hospital issue. While participants recognised inappropriate prescribing as a problem in outpatient settings, many felt that the key drivers were non-primary care settings (eg, urgent care clinics, retail clinics) and patient demand. Participants reacted positively to stewardship efforts aimed at educating patients and clinicians. They questioned the validity of antibiotic prescribing metrics. This scepticism was due to a number of factors, including the feasibility of capturing prescribing quality, a belief that physicians will 'game the system' to improve their measures, and dissatisfaction and distrust of quality measurement in general.

CONCLUSIONS

Stakeholders will need to consider physician attitudes and beliefs about antibiotic stewardship when implementing interventions aimed at improving prescribing.

Do Medicare's Patient-Reported Outcome Measures Collection Windows Accurately Reflect Academic Clinical Practice?

BACKGROUND

The Comprehensive Care for Joint Replacement (CJR) mandates collection of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) for eligible total hip and total knee arthroplasty (THA and TKA) procedures during specific time periods that may not be attainable within routine academic practice.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective analysis of prospectively collected PROM data from a 2017 cohort of primary THA and TKA patients who completed the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System-10 global health survey in preoperative or postoperative time periods. The primary outcome was completion rates of Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System-10 per the CJR collection periods (90-0 days preoperative and 270-365 days postoperative) compared to an extended postoperative collection period of 270-396 days. Bivariate analysis and logistic regression were used to analyze the association between survey completion rates and patient characteristics.

RESULTS

Of the 860 primary THAs and TKAs in 2017, 725 (84.3%) had preoperative surveys completed 90-0 days before surgery. Among the 725 patients, 215 (29.7%) completed postoperative surveys within the CJR timeline of 270-365 days. Completion increased by 120 additional surveys (+16.5%) in the additional postoperative time period of 270-396 days (P < .001). No patient or procedural factors significantly correlated with a higher likelihood of postoperative PROM completion (P > .05 for all covariates).

CONCLUSION

In an academic clinical practice, completion rates of postoperative PROMs as part of routine clinical practice within the CJR mandated period was low for THA and TKA patients. CJR may consider additional time beyond 365 days to improve PROM completion rates.

Characterization and effectiveness of pay-for-performance in ophthalmology: a systematic review

Background

To identify, characterize and compare existing pay-for-performance approaches and their impact on the quality of care and efficiency in ophthalmology.

Methods

A systematic evidence-based review was conducted. English, French and German written literature published between 2000 and 2015 were searched in the following databases: Medline (via PubMed), NCBI web site, Scopus, Web of Knowledge, Econlit and the Cochrane Library. Empirical as well as descriptive articles were included. Controlled clinical trials, meta-analyses, randomized controlled studies as well as observational studies were included as empirical articles. Systematic characterization of identified pay-for-performance approaches (P4P approaches) was conducted according to the “Model for Implementing and Monitoring Incentives for Quality” (MIMIQ). Methodological quality of empirical articles was assessed according to the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme (CASP) checklists.

Results

Overall, 13 relevant articles were included. Eleven articles were descriptive and two articles included empirical analyses. Based on these articles, four different pay-for-performance approaches implemented in the United States were identified. With regard to quality and incentive elements, systematic comparison showed numerous differences between P4P approaches. Empirical studies showed isolated cost or quality effects, while a simultaneous examination of these effects was missing.

Conclusion

Research results show that experiences with pay-for-performance approaches in ophthalmology are limited. Identified approaches differ with regard to quality and incentive elements restricting comparability. Two empirical studies are insufficient to draw strong conclusions about the effectiveness and efficiency of these approaches.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12913-017-2333-x) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

The role of medical group practice administrators in the adoption and implementation of Medicare's physician quality reporting system

BACKGROUND

Although there are numerous studies of the factors influencing the adoption of quality assurance (QA) programs by medical group practices, few have focused on the role of group practice administrators.

PURPOSE

To gain insights into the role these administrators play in QA programs, we analyzed how medical practices adopted and implemented the Medicare Physician Quality Reporting System (PQRS), the largest physician quality reporting system in the United States.

METHODOLOGY

We conducted focus group interviews in 2011 with a national convenience sample of 76 medical group practice administrators. Responses were organized and analyzed using the innovation decision framework of Van de Ven and colleagues.

FINDINGS

Administrators conducted due diligence on PQRS, influenced how the issue was presented to physicians for adoption, and managed implementation thereafter. Administrators' recommendations were heavily influenced by practice characteristics, financial incentives, and practice commitments to early adoption of quality improvement innovations. Virtually, all who attempted it agreed that PQRS was straightforward to implement. However, the complexities of Medicare's PQRS reports impeded use of the data by administrators to support quality management.

DISCUSSION

Group practice administrators are playing a prominent role in activities related to the quality of patient care--they are not limited to the business side of the practice. Especially, as PQRS becomes more nearly universal after 2014, Medicare should take account of the role that administrators play, by more actively engaging administrators in shaping these programs and making it easier for administrators to use the results.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

More research is needed on the rapidly evolving role of nonphysician administration in medical group practices. Practice administrators have a larger role than commonly understood in how quality reporting initiatives are adopted and used and are in an exceptional position to influence the more appropriate use of these resources if supported by more useful forms of quality reporting.

A Cross-Sectional Assessment of the Quality of Physician Quality Reporting System Measures

BACKGROUND

Starting in 2015, the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) requires all Medicare providers to report quality measures through Physician Quality Reporting System (PQRS) or incur a 1.5 % financial penalty. Research indicates that physicians believe this reporting does not lead to high quality care; however, little research has examined what PQRS actually measures, which is reflective of the physicians and patient disease populations being assessed.

OBJECTIVES

(1) Identify the proportion of measures that apply to different medical specialties, types of quality measurement, and National Quality Strategy (NQS) priorities. (2) Identify how different specialties are required to measure quality and NQS priorities. (3) Compare the 2011 and 2015 measures.

DESIGN AND MAIN MEASURES

This was a categorical qualitative analysis of 2011 and 2015 PQRS measures. One hundred and ninety-eight and 254 individual measures, respectively, were analyzed by three domains: medical specialty measured, type of measure, and NQS priority category.

KEY RESULTS

Between 2011 and 2015, the type of measures changed significantly, with fewer processes (85.4 % vs. 66.5 %, p < 0.001) and more outcomes (12.6 % vs. 29.1 %, p < 0.001). The measures showed no significant specialty or NQS category differences. For subcategories within each specialty in 2015, differences in measure type were statistically significant: surgery had the highest percentage of outcomes (61.1 %) compared to 21.7 % of internal medicine and 5.9 % of obstetrics/gynecology. For NQS categories, internal medicine had the highest percentage of effective clinical care measures (68.5 %), compared to 22.2 % in surgery. Surgery had the highest percentage of patient safety (31.9 %) and communication and care coordination measures (27.8 %) compared with internal medicine (5.4 % and 6.5 %).

CONCLUSIONS

Our study shows that PQRS measures include many medical specialties and significantly more outcomes in recent years, particularly for surgery. PQRS still lacks sufficient measures for half of NQS priorities and sufficient outcomes to assess internal medicine and obstetrics/gynecology. CMS must continue to improve PQRS measures to better assess and encourage high-quality care for all Americans.

Predicting shunt failure in children: should the global shunt revision rate be a quality measure?

OBJECT

Ventricular shunts for pediatric hydrocephalus continue to be plagued with high failure rates. Reported risk factors for shunt failure are inconsistent and controversial. The raw or global shunt revision rate has been the foundation of several proposed quality metrics. The authors undertook this study to determine risk factors for shunt revision within their own patient population.

METHODS

In this single-center retrospective cohort study, a database was created of all ventricular shunt operations performed at the authors' institution from January 1, 2010, through December 2013. For each index shunt surgery, demographic, clinical, and procedural variables were assembled. An "index surgery" was defined as implantation of a new shunt or the revision or augmentation of an existing shunt system. Bivariate analyses were first performed to evaluate individual effects of each independent variable on shunt failure at 90 days and at 180 days. A final multivariate model was chosen for each outcome by using a backward model selection approach.

RESULTS

There were 466 patients in the study accounting for 739 unique ("index") operations, for an average of 1.59 procedures per patient. The median age for the cohort at the time of the first shunt surgery was 5 years (range 0-35.7 years), with 53.9% males. The 90- and 180-day shunt failure rates were 24.1% and 29.9%, respectively. The authors found no variable-demographic, clinical, or procedural-that predicted shunt failure within 90 or 180 days.

CONCLUSIONS

In this study, none of the risk factors that were examined were statistically significant in determining shunt failure within 90 or 180 days. Given the negative findings and the fact that all other risk factors for shunt failure that have been proposed in the literature thus far are beyond the control of the surgeon (i.e., nonmodifiable), the use of an institution's or individual's global shunt revision rate remains questionable and needs further evaluation before being accepted as a quality metric.

PQRS Participation, Inappropriate Utilization of Health Care Services, and Medicare Expenditures

Medicare's Physician Quality Reporting System (PQRS) is the largest quality-reporting system in the U.S. health care system and a basis for the new value-based modifier system for physician payment. The PQRS allows health care providers to report measures of quality of care that include both the process of care and physiological outcomes. Using a multivariate difference-in-differences model, we examine the relationship of PQRS participation to three claims-computable measures of inappropriate utilization of health care services and risk-adjusted per capita Medicare expenditures. The data are a national random sample of PQRS-participating providers matched to nonparticipating providers by zip code and caseload. We found few significant relationships in the overall analysis. However, the magnitude and statistical significance of the desirable associations increased in subgroups of providers and beneficiaries more prone to overutilization (e.g., males, older beneficiaries, beneficiaries treated in larger medical practices or by nonphysicians, and practices in rural areas), and among beneficiaries with heart conditions, diabetes, and eye problems.

Hospice admissions for cancer in the final days of life: independent predictors and implications for quality measures

PURPOSE

To define patient characteristics associated with hospice enrollment in the last 3 days of life, and to describe adjusted proportions of patients with late referrals among patient subgroups that could be considered patient-mix adjustment variables for this quality measure.

METHODS

Electronic health record-based retrospective cohort study of patients with cancer admitted to 12 hospices in the Coalition of Hospices Organized to Investigate Comparative Effectiveness network.

RESULTS

Of 64,264 patients admitted to hospice with cancer, 10,460 (16.3%) had a length of stay ≤ 3 days. There was significant variation among hospices (range, 11.4% to 24.5%). In multivariable analysis, among patients referred to hospice, patients who were admitted in the last 3 days of life were more likely to have a hematologic malignancy, were more likely to be male and married, and were younger (age < 65 years). Patients with Medicaid or self-insurance were less likely to be admitted to hospice within 3 days of death.

CONCLUSION

Quality measures of hospice lengths of stay should include patient-mix adjustments for type of cancer and site of care. Patients with hematologic malignancies are at especially increased risk for late admission to hospice.

Practice and payment trends in neurology in 2012

This article describes practice and payment trends among neurologists. Data from the 2012 Practice and Payment Trends survey were compared to results from the 2010 Medical Economics survey. Both surveys were sent to a random sample of 1,000 US practicing neurologists, with a response rate of 32%. Since 2010, there has been an 8% increase in the percent of neurologists working in academic medical centers. Nearly half of neurologists reported working for a hospital-affiliated practice. Wait times have increased 40% for a new patient visit. Only 19% of neurologists indicated procedures as the primary focus of their practice. New delivery models have not yet gained traction with neurologists but the majority (>80%) of neurologists currently use electronic health records in their practice.

Measuring the improving quality of outpatient care in medical oncology practices in the United States

PURPOSE

The American Society of Clinical Oncology Quality Oncology Practice Initiative (QOPI) has provided a method for measuring process-based practice quality since 2006. We sought to determine whether QOPI scores showed improvement in measured quality over time and, if change was demonstrated, which factors in either the measures or participants were associated with improvement.

METHODS

The analysis included 156 practice groups from a larger group of 308 that submitted data from 2006 to 2010. One hundred fifty-two otherwise eligible practices were excluded, most commonly for insufficient data submission. A linear regression model that controlled for varied initial performance was used to estimate the effect of participation over time and evaluate participant and measure characteristics of improvement.

RESULTS

Participants completed a mean of 5.06 (standard deviation, 1.94) rounds of data collection. Adjusted mean quality scores improved from 0.71 (95% CI, 0.42 to 0.91) to 0.85 (95% CI, 0.60 to 0.95). Overall odds ratio of improvement over time was 1.09 (P < .001). The greatest improvement was seen in measures that assessed newly introduced clinical information, in which the mean scores improved from 0.05 (95% CI, 0.01 to 0.17) to 0.69 (95% CI, 0.33 to 0.91; P < .001). Many measures showed no change over time.

CONCLUSION

Many US oncologists have participated in QOPI over the past 6 years. Participation over time was highly correlated with improvement in measured performance. Greater and faster improvement was seen in measures concerning newly introduced clinical information. Some measures showed no change despite opportunity for improvement.

Use of more than one electronic medical record system within a single health care organization

Healthcare organizations vary in the number of electronic medical record (EMR) systems they use. Some use a single EMR for nearly all care they provide, while others use EMRs from more than one vendor. These strategies create a mixture of advantages, risks and costs. Based on our experience in two organizations over a decade, we analyzed use of more than one EMR within our two health care organizations to identify advantages, risks and costs that use of more than one EMR presents. We identified the data and functionality types that pose the greatest challenge to patient safety and efficiency. We present a model to classify patterns of use of more than one EMR within a single healthcare organization, and identified the most important 28 data types and 4 areas of functionality that in our experience present special challenges and safety risks with use of more than one EMR within a single healthcare organization. The use of more than one EMR in a single organization may be the chosen approach for many reasons, but in our organizations the limitations of this approach have also become clear. Those who use and support EMRs realize that to safely and efficiently use more than one EMR, a considerable amount of IT work is necessary. Thorough understanding of the challenges in using more than one EMR is an important prerequisite to minimizing the risks of using more than one EMR to care for patients in a single healthcare organization.