When should measures be updated? Development of a conceptual framework for maintenance of quality-of-care measures
- PMID: 18519624
- DOI: 10.1136/qshc.2006.021170
When should measures be updated? Development of a conceptual framework for maintenance of quality-of-care measures
Abstract
Objective: To document current practices on long-term maintenance of quality measures and to develop a consensus framework to guide the design of maintenance systems.
Study design: Survey of 10 organisations developing measures and selected researchers in the USA about current policies and procedures and desirable properties for a comprehensive system for measures maintenance. Panel discussions with all respondents to arrive at consensus recommendations for a framework for maintenance of measures.
Participants: Five measures developers, two provider and three purchaser organisations. Six were private sector organisations, two were governmental agencies, and two were accreditation institutions.
Principal findings: All organisations had procedures for measures maintenance, but the degree of formalisation of the procedures varied. Three key functions for a measures maintenance system emerged: ad hoc review to deal with unexpected problems; annual maintenance to incorporate changes in coding conventions; and regular re-evaluation to thoroughly review measures at predefined intervals. Importance, scientific soundness, feasibility and usability were universally used as evaluation criteria. The panel discussions yielded a consensus set of recommendations for relationships between maintenance functions, evaluation criteria and measures disposition.
Conclusions: A sufficient degree of implicit consensus was found among leading measures developers to arrive at a consensus framework for policies and procedures for measures maintenance. Although organisations may choose to implement the framework in a way that is most consistent with their mission and structure, it provides guidance regarding which components should be included.
Similar articles
-
[Developing quality indicators in hospitals: the COMPAQH project].Rev Epidemiol Sante Publique. 2005 Sep;53 Spec No 1:1S22-30. Rev Epidemiol Sante Publique. 2005. PMID: 16327737 French.
-
The balanced scorecard: an incremental approach model to health care management.J Health Care Finance. 2002 Summer;28(4):69-80. J Health Care Finance. 2002. PMID: 12148665
-
Implementing and using quality measures for children's health care: perspectives on the state of the practice.Pediatrics. 2004 Jan;113(1 Pt 2):217-27. Pediatrics. 2004. PMID: 14702504
-
Assessing the quality of healthcare provided to children.Health Serv Res. 1998 Oct;33(4 Pt 2):1059-90. Health Serv Res. 1998. PMID: 9776949 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Common ground: a framework for selecting core quality measures for mental health and substance abuse care.Psychiatr Serv. 2002 Mar;53(3):281-7. doi: 10.1176/appi.ps.53.3.281. Psychiatr Serv. 2002. PMID: 11875220 Review.
Cited by
-
A modified Delphi study to identify the features of high quality measurement plans for healthcare improvement projects.BMC Med Res Methodol. 2020 Jan 14;20(1):8. doi: 10.1186/s12874-019-0886-6. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2020. PMID: 31937262 Free PMC article.
-
Systematic approach to evaluating and confirming the utility of a suite of national health system performance (HSP) indicators in Canada: a modified Delphi study.BMJ Open. 2017 Apr 12;7(4):e014772. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2016-014772. BMJ Open. 2017. PMID: 28404612 Free PMC article.
-
Evaluation of quality indicators for Dutch community pharmacies using a comprehensive assessment framework.J Manag Care Spec Pharm. 2015 Feb;21(2):144-52. doi: 10.18553/jmcp.2015.21.2.144. J Manag Care Spec Pharm. 2015. PMID: 25615003 Free PMC article.
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources