Article

Assessment of the Medicare quality improvement organization program.

Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, Baltimore, Maryland 21244-1850, USA.
Annals of internal medicine (Impact Factor: 16.1). 10/2006; 145(5):342-53.
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Studies have shown improvement in quality of health care in the United States. However, the factors responsible for this improvement are largely unknown.
To evaluate the effect of the Medicare Quality Improvement Organization (QIO) Program in 4 clinical settings by using performance data for 41 quality measures during the 7th Scope of Work.
Observational study in which differences in quality measures were compared between baseline and remeasurement periods for providers that received different levels of QIO interventions.
Nursing homes, home health agencies, hospitals, and physician offices in the 50 U.S. states, the District of Columbia, and 2 U.S. territories.
Providers receiving focused QIO assistance related to quality measures and providers receiving general informational assistance from QIOs.
5 nursing home quality measures, 11 home health measures, 21 hospital measures, and 4 physician office measures.
For nursing home, home health, and physician office measures, providers recruited specifically by QIOs for receipt of assistance showed greater improvement in performance on 18 of 20 measures than did providers who were not recruited; similar improvement was seen on the other 2 measures. Nursing homes and home health agencies improved more in all measures on which they chose to work with the QIO than in other measures. Nineteen of 21 hospital measures showed improvement; in this setting, QIOs were contracted for improvement initiatives solely at the statewide level. Overall, improvement was seen in 34 of 41 measures from baseline to remeasurement in the 7th Scope of Work.
As in any observational study, selection bias, regression to the mean, and secular trends may have influenced the results.
These findings are consistent with an impact of the QIO Program and QIO technical assistance on the observed improvement. Future evaluations of the QIO Program will attempt to better address the limitations of the design of this study.

1 Bookmark
 · 
262 Views
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Acute care hospitalization during or immediately following a Medicare home health care (HHC) episode is a major adverse outcome, but little has been published about HHC patient-level risk factors for hospitalization. The authors determined risk factors at HHC admission associated with subsequent acute care hospitalization in a nationally representative Medicare patient sample (N = 374,123). Hospitalization was measured using Medicare claims data; risk factors were measured using Outcome Assessment and Information Set data. Seventeen percent of sample members were hospitalized. Multivariate logistic regression analysis found that the most influential risk factors (all p < .001) were skin wound as primary HHC diagnosis, clinician-judged guarded rehabilitation prognosis, congestive heart failure as primary HHC diagnosis, presence of depressive symptoms, dyspnea severity, and Black, compared to White. HHC initiatives that minimize chronic condition exacerbations and actively treat depressive symptoms might help reduce Medicare patient hospitalizations. Unmeasured reasons for higher hospitalization rates among Black HHC patients deserve further investigation.
    06/2014; 33(4):474-493. DOI:10.1177/0733464812454007
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: OBJECTIVE: Hospital readmissions are common, costly and increasingly viewed as adverse events. In gynecologic oncology, data on readmissions is limited. The goal of this study was to examine the patient, treatment and discharge factors associated with unplanned readmission after cytoreductive surgery. METHODS: We identified all patients with stage II-IV ovarian cancer who underwent surgical cytoreduction at our institution between 2003-2011. A retrospective chart review was performed and clinical variables extracted. Utilizing linear and logistic regression, these clinical variables were correlated with risk of readmission. RESULTS: A total of 460 patients were included in the analysis, with the majority having a Stage IIIC high grade serous cancer. Optimal cytoreduction (<1.0cm residual disease) was obtained in 368 patients (81%) and 233 patients (50%) underwent at least one radical procedure. Perioperative complications were observed in 148 patients (32%). A large proportion of our cohort was discharged to rehabilitation facilities (12%) or with a visiting nurse (38%). Fifty five patients (12%) were readmitted within 30 days. On multivariate logistic regression, reoperation and perioperative cardiopulmonary event were the only factors associated with readmission (OR 3.2, 95% 1.7- 6.0). Discharge home with ancillary services was not protective against readmission, even when controlling for perioperative complications (OR 1.18, CI 0.53-2.64). CONCLUSIONS: Readmission after surgical cytoreduction affected 12% of our population. Multivariate analyses suggested perioperative complications, particularly reoperation and cardiopulmonary event, placed the patient at the greatest risk. Age, comorbidities, surgical radicality and discharge with visiting nurse services/rehabilitation facility did not affect the likelihood of readmission.
    Gynecologic Oncology 06/2013; 130(3). DOI:10.1016/j.ygyno.2013.05.034 · 3.69 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: In the past 25 years, and as recent as 2011, all external evaluations of the Quality Improvement Organization (QIO) Program have found its impact to be small or difficult to discern. The QIO program costs about $200 million on average to administer each year to improve quality of healthcare for people of 65 years or older. The program was created to address questionable quality of care. QIOs review how care is provided based on performance measures. The paper aims to discuss these issues.
    International Journal of Health Care Quality Assurance 05/2014; 27(4):264-70. DOI:10.1108/IJHCQA-02-2013-0017

Full-text (2 Sources)

Download
99 Downloads
Available from
Jun 6, 2014