ABSTRACT
The National Committee for Quality Assurance urges socioeconomic risk adjustment to payments, not quality measures.
Subject(s)
Medicare Part C , Risk Adjustment , Social Class , Humans , Quality Assurance, Health Care , Risk Adjustment/methods , United StatesSubject(s)
Managed Care Programs/organization & administration , Purchasing, Hospital/organization & administration , Value-Based Purchasing/organization & administration , Accountable Care Organizations/organization & administration , Cost Sharing/methods , Costs and Cost Analysis/methods , Humans , Managed Care Programs/economics , Medicare/organization & administration , Purchasing, Hospital/economics , United States , Value-Based Purchasing/economicsSubject(s)
Diabetes Mellitus/blood , Evidence-Based Medicine , Glycated Hemoglobin/analysis , Practice Guidelines as Topic , Quality Indicators, Health Care/trends , Diabetes Mellitus/therapy , Humans , Reference Values , Time Factors , United States , United States Agency for Healthcare Research and QualityABSTRACT
Expanding insurance coverage is a critical step in health reform, but we argue that to be successful, reforms must also address the underlying problems of quality and cost. We identify five fundamental building blocks for a high-performance health system and urge action to create a national center for effectiveness research, develop models of accountable health care entities capable of providing integrated and coordinated care, develop payment models to reward high-value care, develop a national strategy for performance measurement, and pursue a multistakeholder approach to improving population health.
Subject(s)
Delivery of Health Care/standards , Health Care Reform , Insurance, Health/standards , Quality Assurance, Health Care/methods , Health Services Research , Humans , Medical Informatics Applications , Quality Assurance, Health Care/standards , United StatesSubject(s)
Disclosure , Managed Care Programs , Health Benefit Plans, Employee , Humans , United StatesABSTRACT
Quality improvement (QI) activities can improve health care but must be conducted ethically. The Hastings Center convened leaders and scholars to address ethical requirements for QI and their relationship to regulations protecting human subjects of research. The group defined QI as systematic, data-guided activities designed to bring about immediate improvements in health care delivery in particular settings and concluded that QI is an intrinsic part of normal health care operations. Both clinicians and patients have an ethical responsibility to participate in QI, provided that it complies with specified ethical requirements. Most QI activities are not human subjects research and should not undergo review by an institutional review board; rather, appropriately calibrated supervision of QI activities should be part of professional supervision of clinical practice. The group formulated a framework that would use key characteristics of a project and its context to categorize it as QI, human subjects research, or both, with the potential of a customized institutional review board process for the overlap category. The group recommended a period of innovation and evaluation to refine the framework for ethical conduct of QI and to integrate that framework into clinical practice.
Subject(s)
Delivery of Health Care/standards , Quality Assurance, Health Care/ethics , Delivery of Health Care/organization & administration , Ethics Committees, Research , Human Experimentation/ethics , Human Experimentation/legislation & jurisprudence , Humans , United StatesABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Pay for performance (P4P) initiatives are designed to foster and reward improvement in health care delivery. These programs promote "value-based health care" by rewarding quality care that is characterized by a reduced amount of disproportionate spending. OBJECTIVE: To review the intent and design of P4P initiatives as well as the design and results of P4P programs in current practice. SUMMARY: Three key principles are fundamental to building a value-based health care system: measurement, transparency, and accountability. There are several levers currently driving P4P, each influencing the movement in its own way. Among these are employers, federal agencies such as the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services and the Department of Health and Human Services, health plans, providers, accreditors, and Congress. One key player in the P4P movement, the National Committee for Quality Assurance (NCQA), is a private, independent nonprofit health care quality oversight organization that measures and reports on health care quality and unites diverse groups around a common goal: improving health care quality. NCQA, has demonstrated several successful provider-level measurement initiatives connected to P4P programs, notable among them Bridges to Excellence programs in several markets, physician recognition programs, the Integrated Healthcare Association's P4P initiative in California, the National Forum on Performance Benchmarking of Physician Offices and Organizations, and health plan accreditation. CONCLUSIONS: The initial data from developmental P4P programs across the nation have indicated that both financial and nonfinancial incentives motivate significant change in health care delivery, but the return on investment of these initiatives is not yet known.