Fix These First: How the World's Leading Companies Point the Way Toward High Reliability in the Military Health System.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: The 2014 Military Health System Review calls for healthcare system leaders to implement effective strategies used by other high-performing organizations. The authors state, " the [military health system] MHS can create an optimal healthcare environment that focuses on continuous quality improvement where every patient receives safe, high-quality care at all times" (Military Health System, 2014, p. 1). Although aspirational, the document does not specify how a highly reliable health system is developed or what systemic factors are necessary to sustain highly reliable performance. Our work seeks to address this gap and provide guidance to MHS leaders regarding how high-performing organizations develop exceptional levels of performance.The authors' expectation is that military medicine will draw on these lessons to enhance leadership, develop exceptional organizational cultures, onboard and engage employees, build customer loyalty, and improve quality of care. Leaders from other segments of the healthcare field likely will find this study valuable given the size of the military healthcare system (9.6 million beneficiaries), the United States' steady progression toward population-based health, and the increasing need for highly reliable systems and performance.

Board oversight of patient care quality in community health systems.

In hospitals and health systems, ensuring that standards for the quality of patient care are established and continuous improvement processes are in place are among the board's most fundamental responsibilities. A recent survey has examined governance oversight of patient care quality at 123 nonprofit community health systems and compared their practices with current benchmarks of good governance. The findings show that 88% of the boards have established standing committees on patient quality and safety, nearly all chief executive officers' performance expectations now include targets related to patient quality and safety, and 96% of the boards regularly receive formal written reports regarding their organizations' performance in relation to quality measures and standards. However, there continue to be gaps between present reality and current benchmarks of good governance in several areas. These gaps are somewhat greater for independent systems than for those affiliated with a larger parent organization.

Dual use of Medicare and the Veterans Health Administration: are there adverse health outcomes?

BACKGROUND: Millions of veterans are eligible to use the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) and Medicare because of their military service and age. This article examines whether an indirect measure of dual use based on inpatient services is associated with increased mortality risk. METHODS: Data on 1,566 self-responding men (weighted N = 1,522) from the Survey of Assets and Health Dynamics among the Oldest Old (AHEAD) were linked to Medicare claims and the National Death Index. Dual use was indirectly indicated when the self-reported number of hospital episodes in the 12 months prior to baseline was greater than that observed in the Medicare claims. The independent association of dual use with mortality was estimated using proportional hazards regression. RESULTS: 96 (11%) of the veterans were classified as dual users. 766 men (50.3%) had died by December 31, 2002, including 64.9% of the dual users and 49.3% of all others, for an attributable mortality risk of 15.6% (p < .003). Adjusting for demographics, socioeconomics, comorbidity, hospitalization status, and selection bias at baseline, as well as subsequent hospitalization for ambulatory care sensitive conditions, the independent effect of dual use was a 56.1% increased relative risk of mortality (AHR = 1.561; p = .009). CONCLUSION: An indirect measure of veterans' dual use of the VHA and Medicare systems, based on inpatient services, was associated with an increased risk of death. Further examination of dual use, especially in the outpatient setting, is needed, because dual inpatient and dual outpatient use may be different phenomena.