Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Journal of General Internal Medicine 8/2007

01-08-2007 | Perspectives

Measuring Quality of Care in Patients With Multiple Clinical Conditions: Summary of a Conference Conducted by the Society of General Internal Medicine

Authors: Rachel M. Werner, MD, PhD, Sheldon Greenfield, MD, Constance Fung, MD, MSHS, Barbara J. Turner, MD, MSEd

Published in: Journal of General Internal Medicine | Issue 8/2007

Login to get access

Abstract

Performance measurement has been widely advocated as a means to improve health care delivery and, ultimately, clinical outcomes. However, the evidence supporting the value of using the same quality measures designed for patients with a single clinical condition in patients with multiple conditions is weak. If clinically complex patients, defined here as patients with multiple clinical conditions, present greater challenges to achieving quality goals, providers may shun them or ignore important, but unmeasured, clinical issues. This paper summarizes the proceedings of a conference addressing the challenge of measuring quality of care in the patient with multiple clinical conditions with the goal of informing the implementation of quality measurement systems and future research programs on this topic. The conference had three main areas of discussion. First, the potential problems caused by applying current quality standards to patients with multiple conditions were examined. Second, the advantages and disadvantages of three strategies to improve quality measurement in clinically complex patients were evaluated: excluding certain clinically complex patients from a given standard, relaxing the performance target, and assigning a greater weight to some measures based on the expected clinical benefit or difficulty of reaching the performance target. Third, the strengths and weaknesses of potential novel measures such change in functional status were considered. The group concurred that, because clinically complex patients present a threat to the implementation of quality measures, high priority must be assigned to a research agenda on this topic. This research should evaluate the impact of quality measurement on these patients and expand the range of quality measures relevant to the care of clinically complex patients.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
go back to reference Nichols LM, O’Malley AS. Hospital payment systems: will payers like the future better than the past? Health Aff (Millwood). 2006;25:81–93.CrossRef Nichols LM, O’Malley AS. Hospital payment systems: will payers like the future better than the past? Health Aff (Millwood). 2006;25:81–93.CrossRef
4.
go back to reference Christianson JB, Knutson DJ, Mazze RS. Physician pay-for-performance. Implementation and research issues. J Gen Intern Med. 2006;21(Suppl 2):9S–13S.CrossRef Christianson JB, Knutson DJ, Mazze RS. Physician pay-for-performance. Implementation and research issues. J Gen Intern Med. 2006;21(Suppl 2):9S–13S.CrossRef
5.
go back to reference Levin-Scherz J, DeVita N, Timbie J. Impact of pay-for-performance contracts and network registry on diabetes and asthma HEDIS measures in an integrated delivery network. Med Care Res Rev. 2006;63:14S–28S.PubMedCrossRef Levin-Scherz J, DeVita N, Timbie J. Impact of pay-for-performance contracts and network registry on diabetes and asthma HEDIS measures in an integrated delivery network. Med Care Res Rev. 2006;63:14S–28S.PubMedCrossRef
6.
go back to reference Grossbart SR. What’s the return? Assessing the effect of “pay-for-performance” initiatives on the quality of care delivery. Med Care Res Rev. 2006;63:29S–48S.PubMedCrossRef Grossbart SR. What’s the return? Assessing the effect of “pay-for-performance” initiatives on the quality of care delivery. Med Care Res Rev. 2006;63:29S–48S.PubMedCrossRef
7.
go back to reference Jaen CR, Stange KC, Nutting PA. Competing demands of primary care: a model for the delivery of clinical preventive services. J Fam Pract. 1994;38:166–71.PubMed Jaen CR, Stange KC, Nutting PA. Competing demands of primary care: a model for the delivery of clinical preventive services. J Fam Pract. 1994;38:166–71.PubMed
8.
go back to reference Nutting PA, Baier M, Werner JJ, Cutter G, Conry C, Stewart L. Competing demands in the office visit: what influences mammography recommendations? J Am Board Fam Pract. 2001;14:352–61.PubMed Nutting PA, Baier M, Werner JJ, Cutter G, Conry C, Stewart L. Competing demands in the office visit: what influences mammography recommendations? J Am Board Fam Pract. 2001;14:352–61.PubMed
9.
go back to reference Nutting PA, Rost K, Smith J, Werner JJ, Elliott C. Competing demands from physical problems: effect on initiating and completing depression care over 6 months. Arch Fam Med. 2000;9:1059–64.PubMedCrossRef Nutting PA, Rost K, Smith J, Werner JJ, Elliott C. Competing demands from physical problems: effect on initiating and completing depression care over 6 months. Arch Fam Med. 2000;9:1059–64.PubMedCrossRef
10.
go back to reference Anderson G, Horvarth J. Chronic Conditions: Making the Case for Ongoing Care. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins Press; 2002. Anderson G, Horvarth J. Chronic Conditions: Making the Case for Ongoing Care. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins Press; 2002.
11.
go back to reference Greenfield S, Apolone G, McNeil BJ, Cleary PD. The importance of co-existent disease in the occurrence of postoperative complications and one-year recovery in patients undergoing total hip replacement. Comorbidity and outcomes after hip replacement. Med Care. 1993;31:141–54.PubMedCrossRef Greenfield S, Apolone G, McNeil BJ, Cleary PD. The importance of co-existent disease in the occurrence of postoperative complications and one-year recovery in patients undergoing total hip replacement. Comorbidity and outcomes after hip replacement. Med Care. 1993;31:141–54.PubMedCrossRef
12.
go back to reference Greenfield S, Sullivan L, Dukes KA, Silliman R, D’Agostino R, Kaplan SH. Development and testing of a new measure of case mix for use in office practice. Med Care. 1995;33:AS47–55.PubMed Greenfield S, Sullivan L, Dukes KA, Silliman R, D’Agostino R, Kaplan SH. Development and testing of a new measure of case mix for use in office practice. Med Care. 1995;33:AS47–55.PubMed
13.
go back to reference Anderson G, Knickman JR. Changing the chronic care system to meet people’s needs. Health Aff (Millwood). 2001;20:146–60.CrossRef Anderson G, Knickman JR. Changing the chronic care system to meet people’s needs. Health Aff (Millwood). 2001;20:146–60.CrossRef
14.
go back to reference Sheifer SE, Escarce JJ, Schulman KA. Race and sex differences in the management of coronary artery disease. Am Heart J. 2000;139:848–57.PubMedCrossRef Sheifer SE, Escarce JJ, Schulman KA. Race and sex differences in the management of coronary artery disease. Am Heart J. 2000;139:848–57.PubMedCrossRef
15.
go back to reference Fiscella K, Franks P. Influence of patient education on profiles of physician practices. Ann Intern Med. 1999;131:745–51.PubMed Fiscella K, Franks P. Influence of patient education on profiles of physician practices. Ann Intern Med. 1999;131:745–51.PubMed
16.
go back to reference Hippisley-Cox J, O’Hanlon S, Coupland C. Association of deprivation, ethnicity, and sex with quality indicators for diabetes: population based survey of 53,000 patients in primary care. BMJ. 2004;329:1267–9.PubMedCrossRef Hippisley-Cox J, O’Hanlon S, Coupland C. Association of deprivation, ethnicity, and sex with quality indicators for diabetes: population based survey of 53,000 patients in primary care. BMJ. 2004;329:1267–9.PubMedCrossRef
17.
go back to reference Franks P, Fiscella K. Effect of patient socioeconomic status on physician profiles for prevention, disease management, and diagnostic testing costs. Med Care. 2002;40:717–24.PubMedCrossRef Franks P, Fiscella K. Effect of patient socioeconomic status on physician profiles for prevention, disease management, and diagnostic testing costs. Med Care. 2002;40:717–24.PubMedCrossRef
18.
19.
go back to reference Tinetti ME, Bogardus ST, Jr., Agostini JV. Potential pitfalls of disease-specific guidelines for patients with multiple conditions. N Engl J Med. 2004;351:2870–4.PubMedCrossRef Tinetti ME, Bogardus ST, Jr., Agostini JV. Potential pitfalls of disease-specific guidelines for patients with multiple conditions. N Engl J Med. 2004;351:2870–4.PubMedCrossRef
20.
go back to reference Boyd CM, Darer J, Boult C, Fried LP, Boult L, Wu AW. Clinical practice guidelines and quality of care for older patients with multiple comorbid diseases: implications for pay for performance. JAMA. 2005;294:716–24.PubMedCrossRef Boyd CM, Darer J, Boult C, Fried LP, Boult L, Wu AW. Clinical practice guidelines and quality of care for older patients with multiple comorbid diseases: implications for pay for performance. JAMA. 2005;294:716–24.PubMedCrossRef
21.
go back to reference Piette JD, Kerr EA. The impact of comorbid chronic conditions on diabetes care. Diabetes Care. 2006;29:725–31.PubMedCrossRef Piette JD, Kerr EA. The impact of comorbid chronic conditions on diabetes care. Diabetes Care. 2006;29:725–31.PubMedCrossRef
22.
go back to reference Drurso SC. Using clinical guidelines designed for older adults with diabetes mellitus and complex health status. JAMA. 2006;295:1935–40.CrossRef Drurso SC. Using clinical guidelines designed for older adults with diabetes mellitus and complex health status. JAMA. 2006;295:1935–40.CrossRef
23.
go back to reference Kravitz RL, Duan N, Braslow J. Evidence-based medicine, heterogeneity of treatment effects, and the trouble with averages. Milbank Q. 2004;82:661–87.PubMedCrossRef Kravitz RL, Duan N, Braslow J. Evidence-based medicine, heterogeneity of treatment effects, and the trouble with averages. Milbank Q. 2004;82:661–87.PubMedCrossRef
24.
go back to reference Greenfield S, Kravitz R, et al. Heterogeneity of treatment effects: implications for guidelines, payment, and quality assessment. Am J Med. 2007;120(4 Suppl 1):3S–9S.CrossRef Greenfield S, Kravitz R, et al. Heterogeneity of treatment effects: implications for guidelines, payment, and quality assessment. Am J Med. 2007;120(4 Suppl 1):3S–9S.CrossRef
25.
go back to reference Iezzoni L. Risk Adjustment for Measuring Healthcare Outcomes. 2nd ed. Chicago, IL: Health Administration Press; 1997. Iezzoni L. Risk Adjustment for Measuring Healthcare Outcomes. 2nd ed. Chicago, IL: Health Administration Press; 1997.
26.
go back to reference Litwin MS, Greenfield S, Elkin EP, Lubeck D, Broering JM, Kaplan SH. Mortality is predicted by a comorbidity measure in men with prostate cancer. Cancer. 2007 (in press). Litwin MS, Greenfield S, Elkin EP, Lubeck D, Broering JM, Kaplan SH. Mortality is predicted by a comorbidity measure in men with prostate cancer. Cancer. 2007 (in press).
27.
go back to reference Rost K, Nutting PA, Smith J, et al. The role of competing demands in the treatment provided primary care patients with major depression. Arch Fam Med. 2000;9:150–4.PubMedCrossRef Rost K, Nutting PA, Smith J, et al. The role of competing demands in the treatment provided primary care patients with major depression. Arch Fam Med. 2000;9:150–4.PubMedCrossRef
28.
go back to reference Fortin M, Dionne J, Pinho G, Gignac J, Almirall J, Lapointe L. Randomized controlled trials: do they have external validity for patients with multiple comorbidities? Ann Fam Med. 2006;4:104–8.PubMedCrossRef Fortin M, Dionne J, Pinho G, Gignac J, Almirall J, Lapointe L. Randomized controlled trials: do they have external validity for patients with multiple comorbidities? Ann Fam Med. 2006;4:104–8.PubMedCrossRef
29.
go back to reference Redelmeier DA, Tan SH, Booth GL. The treatment of unrelated disorders in patients with chronic medical diseases. N Engl J Med. 1998;338:1516–20.PubMedCrossRef Redelmeier DA, Tan SH, Booth GL. The treatment of unrelated disorders in patients with chronic medical diseases. N Engl J Med. 1998;338:1516–20.PubMedCrossRef
30.
go back to reference Parchman ML, Noel PH, Lee S. Primary care attributes, health care system hassles, and chronic illness. Med Care. 2005;43:1123–9.PubMedCrossRef Parchman ML, Noel PH, Lee S. Primary care attributes, health care system hassles, and chronic illness. Med Care. 2005;43:1123–9.PubMedCrossRef
32.
go back to reference Safran DG, Kosinski M, Tarlov AR, et al. The primary care assessment survey: Tests of data quality and measurement performance. Med Care. 1998;36:728.PubMedCrossRef Safran DG, Kosinski M, Tarlov AR, et al. The primary care assessment survey: Tests of data quality and measurement performance. Med Care. 1998;36:728.PubMedCrossRef
33.
go back to reference Safran DG, Karp M, Coltin K, et al. Measuring patients’ experiences with individual primary care physicians. Results of a statewide demonstration project. J Gen Intern Med. 2006;21:13–21.PubMedCrossRef Safran DG, Karp M, Coltin K, et al. Measuring patients’ experiences with individual primary care physicians. Results of a statewide demonstration project. J Gen Intern Med. 2006;21:13–21.PubMedCrossRef
35.
go back to reference Doran T, Fullwood C, Gravelle H, et al. Pay-for-performance programs in family practices in the United Kingdom. N Engl J Med. 2006;355:375–84.PubMedCrossRef Doran T, Fullwood C, Gravelle H, et al. Pay-for-performance programs in family practices in the United Kingdom. N Engl J Med. 2006;355:375–84.PubMedCrossRef
Metadata
Title
Measuring Quality of Care in Patients With Multiple Clinical Conditions: Summary of a Conference Conducted by the Society of General Internal Medicine
Authors
Rachel M. Werner, MD, PhD
Sheldon Greenfield, MD
Constance Fung, MD, MSHS
Barbara J. Turner, MD, MSEd
Publication date
01-08-2007
Publisher
Springer-Verlag
Published in
Journal of General Internal Medicine / Issue 8/2007
Print ISSN: 0884-8734
Electronic ISSN: 1525-1497
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11606-007-0230-4

Other articles of this Issue 8/2007

Journal of General Internal Medicine 8/2007 Go to the issue
Live Webinar | 27-06-2024 | 18:00 (CEST)

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Live: Thursday 27th June 2024, 18:00-19:30 (CEST)

WHO estimates that half of all patients worldwide are non-adherent to their prescribed medication. The consequences of poor adherence can be catastrophic, on both the individual and population level.

Join our expert panel to discover why you need to understand the drivers of non-adherence in your patients, and how you can optimize medication adherence in your clinics to drastically improve patient outcomes.

Prof. Kevin Dolgin
Prof. Florian Limbourg
Prof. Anoop Chauhan
Developed by: Springer Medicine
Obesity Clinical Trial Summary

At a glance: The STEP trials

A round-up of the STEP phase 3 clinical trials evaluating semaglutide for weight loss in people with overweight or obesity.

Developed by: Springer Medicine

Highlights from the ACC 2024 Congress

Year in Review: Pediatric cardiology

Watch Dr. Anne Marie Valente present the last year's highlights in pediatric and congenital heart disease in the official ACC.24 Year in Review session.

Year in Review: Pulmonary vascular disease

The last year's highlights in pulmonary vascular disease are presented by Dr. Jane Leopold in this official video from ACC.24.

Year in Review: Valvular heart disease

Watch Prof. William Zoghbi present the last year's highlights in valvular heart disease from the official ACC.24 Year in Review session.

Year in Review: Heart failure and cardiomyopathies

Watch this official video from ACC.24. Dr. Biykem Bozkurt discusses last year's major advances in heart failure and cardiomyopathies.