The effects of disseminating performance data to health plans: results of qualitative research with the Medicare Managed Care plans.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the information needs and responses of managed care plans to the Medicare Managed Care Consumer Assessment of Health Plans Study (MMC-CAHPS). DATA SOURCES/STUDY SETTING: One hundred sixty-five representatives of Medicare managed care plans participated in focus groups or interviews in the spring of 1998, 1999, and 2000. STUDY DESIGN: In 1998 focus groups were conducted with representatives of managed care plans to develop and test a print report of MMC-CAHPS results. After the reports were disseminated focus groups and interviews were conducted in 1999 and 2000 to identify perceptions, uses, and potential enhancements of the report. DATA COLLECTION/EXTRACTION METHODS: The study team conducted a total of 23 focus groups and 12 telephone interviews and analyzed the transcripts to identify major themes. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: In 1998 participants identified the report content and format that best enabled them to assess their performance relative to other Medicare managed care plans. In 1999 and 2000 participants described their responses to and uses of the report. They reported comparing the MMC-CAHPS results to internal surveys and presenting the results to senior managers, market analysts, and quality-improvement teams. They also indicated that the report's usefulness would be enhanced if it were received within six months of survey completion and if additional data analysis was presented. CONCLUSIONS: Focus group results suggest that the MMC-CAHPS report enhances awareness and knowledge of the comparative performance of Medicare managed care plans. However, participants reported needing additional analysis of survey results to target quality-improvement activities on the populations with the most reported problems.

Conference overview: through the patient's eyes--improvement strategies that work.

BACKGROUND: To promote a continuing dialogue among innovators in patient-centered health care quality assessment and improvement, The Picker Institute (Boston) sponsored conferences in 1995 and 1996, and in July 1997 launched the first of its summer symposia designed primarily for its clients. This overview summarizes the work and ideas presented at The Picker Institute's second summer symposium, "Through the Patient's Eyes: Improvement Strategies That Work," held in Cambridge, Massachusetts, on July 9-10, 1998. ISSUES AND PARTICIPANTS: Plenary session speaker David H. Gustafson, PhD, emphasized four key themes in his discussion of breakthrough improvement and service-focus on customers, innovation through information technology, an empirical methodology for predicting success, and leadership. Donald M. Berwick, MD, argued that it is better to treat the consumer not as an inspector but as an integral element in the total system of health care. In the closing plenary session, John Stone, MD, stated that although physicians like to think of themselves as teachers, it is the patients who teach them with the stories they bring. "Listen to the patient," he concluded. "The patient is telling you the diagnosis." Health care researchers and professionals, representing a wide variety of settings and patient conditions, reported in breakout sessions on their practical experiences using patient-generated data on quality and strategies for improving care. Several presenters described their practical experience using patient-centered measures as part of a coordinated approach to systemwide improvement. In other sessions, presenters offered advice about how to present patient survey data to colleagues and encourage their participation in prioritizing and acting on improvement opportunities.

The built environment as a component of quality care: understanding and including the patient's perspective.

BACKGROUND: Although there has been little systematic assessment of how the built environment of health care facilities affects the quality of care, the built environment is a major element of structure of care--one of three facets of quality. Yet in contrast to the growing trend of using consumer perceptions of both processes and outcomes of care in QI activities, quality assessments of the structure of care do not currently rely on patient feedback. PURPOSE OF PROJECT: During the initial phase of a multiphase project, nine focus groups were conducted in 1997 to identify the salient dimensions of experience from the patient's perspective. The content of these focus groups guided the development of assessment tools in the second phase of the project, which began in February 1998. FINDINGS: Participants in three focus groups that were held in each of three settings--ambulatory care, acute care, and long term care--described in detail a variety of reactions to the built environment. Analysis revealed eight consistent themes in what patients and family member consumers look for in the built environment of health care. In all three settings, they want an environment, for example, that facilitates a connection to staff and caregivers, is conducive to a sense of well-being, and facilitates a connection to the outside world. DISCUSSION: Data derived from the focus group research has guided the development of quantitative survey and assessment tools. For each setting, patient-centered checklists and questionnaires are designed to help institutions set priorities for the improvement of facility design from the patient's perspective.

Medical patients' assessments of their care during hospitalization: insights for internists.

OBJECTIVE: To assess, from the patient's perspective, selected aspects of the quality of inpatient hospital care in the United States. DESIGN: A cross-sectional survey, using telephone interviews of patients discharged from the medical services of a probability sample of 62 public and private, nonprofit, nonfederal acute care hospitals in the United States. The participating patients reported; discrete, clinically important elements of hospital care; preferences for involvement in care; health status; sociodemographic characteristics; and overall satisfaction with their hospitalization. PATIENTS/PARTICIPANTS: 2,839 patients drawn as a probability sample. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: For 32 of the 50 questions about potential problems encountered during hospitalization, at least 10% of the patients gave a response indicating a problem. One-third of the patients having a physician (31.8%) reported that that physician did not care for them during hospitalization. Other frequently reported problems included not receiving information about the hospital routine (45.1%), not being told whom to ask for help (33.9%), having pain that could have been relieved by more prompt attention (19.9%), and not being given adequate information and guidance about activities and care after discharge from the hospital (21.4-36.1%). Most patients preferred to be informed about important aspects of their care (94.7%), but their preferences for involvement in care varied widely. CONCLUSIONS: Information from hospitalized medical patients identified several areas of concern that should be the focus of attention and could lead to systematic restructuring of hospital-based care.

Using patient reports to improve medical care: a preliminary report from 10 hospitals.

This article describes the early activities of the Picker/Commonwealth Program for Patient-Centered Care and reports results from a study of 10 hospitals trying to develop better ways of providing patient-centered care. Reported problems were relatively infrequent, but several problems occurred as often as in an earlier national study of acute care hospitals. Academic medical centers and other teaching hospitals tended to have more problems than nonteaching hospitals, but there was great variability within hospital types. The article discusses ways patient reports can be used to improve the quality of hospital care.

Private insurance for Medicaid recipients: the Texas experience.

Shifting financial risk from the public to the private sector is an increasingly attractive option to policymakers seeking to constrain Medicaid costs. This paper discusses the potential advantages and disadvantages of private insurance arrangements for Medicaid recipients and examines the Texas Purchased Health Services Program, the oldest and largest private insurance program for Medicaid recipients in the U.S. Our analysis of the Texas program suggests that while the political benefits are real, the administrative costs are substantial and the fiscal benefits uncertain. While overall benefits may outweigh costs in Texas, differing political and fiscal circumstances may alter the balance in other states considering private insurance arrangements.