Harmonization of the ICHOM Quality Measures to Enable Health Outcomes Measurement in Multimorbid Patients

Balancing adaptability and standardisation: insights from 27 routinely implemented ICHOM standard sets

BACKGROUND

Healthcare systems around the world experience increasing pressure to control future growth of healthcare expenditures. Among other initiatives, quality and value-based benchmarking has become an important field to inform clinical evaluation and reimbursement questions. The International Consortium for Health Outcomes Measurement (ICHOM) has become one of the driving forces to translate scientific evidence into standardized assessments that are routinely applicable in day-to-day care settings. These aim to provide a benchmarking tool that allows the comparison and competition of health care delivery on the basis of value-based health care principles.

METHODS

This work focuses on the consolidation of the ICHOM methodology and presents insights from 27 routinely implemented Standard Sets. The analysis is based on a literature review of the ICHOM literature repository, a process document review and key informant interviews with ICHOM's outcomes research and development team.

RESULTS

Key findings are that the scope of ICHOM Standard Sets shifted from a more static focus on burden of disease and poorly standardized care pathways to a more dynamic approach that also takes into account questions about the setting of care, feasibility of implementing a benchmarking tool and compatibility of different Standard Sets. Although certain overlaps exist with other initiatives in the field of patient reported outcomes (PRO), their scopes differ significantly and they hence rather complement each other. ICHOM pursues a pragmatic approach to enable the benchmarking and the analysis of healthcare delivery following the principles of value-based healthcare.

CONCLUSION

The ICHOM Standard Sets complement other initiatives in the field of patient-reported outcomes (PRO) and functional reporting by placing a particular focus on healthcare delivery, while other initiatives primarily focus on evaluation of academic endpoints. Although ICHOM promotes a pragmatic approach towards developing and devising its Standard Sets, the definition of standardized decision making processes emerged as one of the key challenges. Furthermore, the consolidation of core metrics across number of disease areas to enable the parallel implementation of different Standard Sets in the same care setting is an important goal that will enable the widespread implementation of patient-reported outcome measures (PROM).

On the Annotation of Health Care Pathways to Allow the Application of Care-Plans That Generate Data for Multiple Purposes

Objectives: Procedural interoperability in health care requires information support and monitoring of a common work practice. Our aim was to devise an information model for a complete annotation of actions in clinical pathways that allow use of multiple plans concomitantly as several partial processes underlie any composite clinical process. Materials and Methods: The development of the information model was based on the integration of a defined protocol for clinical interoperability in the care of patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and an observational study protocol for cohort characterization at the group level. In the clinical process patient reported outcome measures were included. Results: The clinical protocol and the observation study protocol were developed on the clinical level and a single plan definition was developed by merging of the protocols. The information model and a common data model that had been developed for care pathways was successfully implemented and data for the medical records and the observational study could be extracted independently. The interprofessional process support improved the communication between the stakeholders (health care professionals, clinical scientists and providers). Discussion: We successfully merged the processes and had a functionally successful pilot demonstrating a seamless appearance for the health care professionals, while at the same time it was possible to generate data that could serve quality registries and clinical research. The adopted data model was initially tested and hereby published to the public domain. Conclusion: The use of a patient centered information model and data annotation focused on the care pathway simplifies the annotation of data for different purposes and supports sharing of knowledge along the patient care path.