Reporting for provider performance: Should we punish the bad, or try to make them all good?

American Heart Journal

Volumn 152, Issue 3, 2006, Pages 410-413

  Ferguson Jr , T Bruce ^a,b  

^a LOUISIANA STATE UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

^b LOUISIANA STATE UNIVERSITY HEALTH SCIENCES CENTER   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CORONARY ARTERY BYPASS GRAFT; EDITORIAL; HEALTH CARE DELIVERY; HEALTH CARE QUALITY; HEART SURGERY; HIGH RISK PATIENT; HOSPITAL; HUMAN; MORTALITY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUALITY CONTROL; SURGEON; UNITED STATES;

HEALTH PERSONNEL; HUMANS; INSURANCE CLAIM REPORTING; MEDICARE; PHYSICIAN'S PRACTICE PATTERNS; QUALITY INDICATORS, HEALTH CARE;

EID: 33747192091     PISSN: 00028703     EISSN: 10976744     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.ahj.2006.01.017     Document Type: Editorial

References (27)

1. Institute of Medicine. To err is human. Building a safer health system. Accessed at. http://www.iom.edu/object.file/master/4/117/0.pdf [Accessed 12/11/05]
2. Ferguson Jr. T.B., Peterson E.D., Coombs L.P., et al. Use of continuous quality improvement to increase use of process measures in patients undergoing coronary artery bypass graft surgery: a randomized controlled trial. JAMA 290 (2003) 49-56
3. Bradley E.H., Holmboe E.S., Mettera J.A., et al. A qualitative study of increasing beta-blocker use after myocardial infarction: why do some hospitals succeed?. JAMA 285 (2001) 2604-2611
4. Kiefe C.I., Allison J.J., Williams O.D., et al. Improving quality improvement using achievable benchmarks for physician feedback: a randomized controlled trial. JAMA 285 (2001) 2871-2879
5. Roe M.T., and Peterson E.D. Improvements in quality improvement. Am Heart J 149 (2005) 751-752
6. McGlynn E.A., Asch S.M., Adams J., et al. The quality of health care delivered to adults in the United States. N Engl J Med 348 (2003) 2635-2645
7. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. Department of Health and Human Services. Cited at http://www.ahrq.gov/consumer/guidetoq/guidetoq4.htm. Accessed 12/11/05.
8. Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, Department of Health and Human Services. Cited at http://www.hospitalcompare.hhs.gov. Accessed 12/11/05.
9. Pacific Business Group on Health. Advancing physician performance measurement: using administrative data to assess physician quality and efficiency. Available at. http://www.pbgh.org/news/eletters/documents/PBGHP3Report_09-01-05final.pdf [Accessed 12/11/05]
10. Dranove D., Kessler D., McClellan M., et al. Is more information better? The effects of "Report Cards" on Health Care Providers. J Polit Econ 111 (2003) 555-588
11. Marshall M.N., Shekelle P.G., Leatherman S., et al. The public release of performance data: what do we expect to gain? A review of the evidence. JAMA 283 (2000) 1866-1874
12. Bentley J.M., and Nash D.M. How Pennsylvania hospitals have responded to publicly released reports on coronary artery bypass graft surgery. Joint Comm J Qual Improv 24 (1998) 40-49
13. Chassin M.R. Achieving and sustaining improved quality: lesson learned from New York State and cardiac surgery. Health Aff (Millwood) 21 (2002) 40-51
14. Guru V., Fremes S.E., Naylor C.D., et al. Public vs. Private institutional performance reporting: what is mandatory for quality improvement?. Am Heart J 152 (2006) 573-578
15. Hannan E.L., Kilburn H., Racz M., et al. Improving the outcomes of coronary artery bypass surgery in New York State. JAMA 271 (1994) 761-766
16. Peterson E.D., et al. The effects of New York's bypass surgery provider profiling on access to care and patient outcomes in the elderly. J Am Coll Cardiol 32 (1998) 993-999
17. O'Connor G.T., Plume S.K., Olmstead E.M., et al. A regional intervention to improve the hospital mortality associated with coronary artery bypass graft surgery: the Northern New England Cardiovascular Disease Study Group. JAMA 275 (1996) 841-846
18. Ferguson Jr. T.B., Hammill B., Peterson E.D., et al. A decade of change: risk profiles and outcomes for isolated CABG procedures, 1990-99: a report from the STS National Database Committee and the Duke Clinical Research Institute. Ann Thorac Surg 73 (2002) 480-490
19. Grover F.L., Shroyer A.W.L., Hammermeister K.E., et al. A decade's experience with quality improvement in cardiac surgery using the Veterans Affairs and Society of Thoracic Surgeons National Databases. Ann Surg 234 (2001) 464-474
20. Holman W.L., Allman R.M., Sansom M., et al. Alabama CABG Study Group: Alabama coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) project: results of a statewide quality improvement initiative. JAMA 285 (2001) 3003-3010
21. Arom K.V., Peterson R.J., Orszulak T.A., et al. Establishing and using a local/regional Cardiac Surgery Database. Ann Thorac Surg 64 (1997) 1245-1249
22. Kawachi Y., Nakashima A., Toshima Y., et al. Risk stratification analysis of operative mortality in heart and thoracic aorta surgery: comparison between Parsonnet and EuroSCORE additive model. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 20 (2001) 961-966
23. Gogbashian A., Sedrakyan A., and Treasure T. EuroSCORE: a systematic review of international performance. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 25 (2004) 695-700
24. Grol R. Improving the quality of medical care: building bridges among professional pride, payer profit, and patient satisfaction. JAMA 286 (2001) 2578-2585
25. Grunkemeier G., Zerr K.J., and Jin R. Cardiac surgery report cards: making the grade. Ann Thorac Surg 72 (2001) 1845-1848
26. The National Quality Forum Cardiac Surgery Performance Measures Project. Cited at http://www.qualityforum.org/docs/cardiac_care/webcardiacPUBLIC02-07-05.pdf. Accessed 12/11/05.
27. Rosenthal M.B., Fernandopulie R., RyuSong H., et al. Paying for quality: providers' incentives for quality improvement. Health Aff 23 (2004) 127-144