Summary measures of quality of diabetes care: Comparison of continuous weighted performance measurement and dichotomous thresholds

International Journal for Quality in Health Care

Volumn 19, Issue 1, 2007, Pages 29-36

  Aron, David ^a   Rajan, Mangala ^b   Pogach, Leonard M ^b  

^a LOUIS STOKES CLEVELAND VA MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

^b VETERANS AFFAIRS MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

Author keywords

Diabetes; Quality measurement; Quality of care

Indexed keywords

HEMOGLOBIN A1C; LOW DENSITY LIPOPROTEIN CHOLESTEROL;

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; CHOLESTEROL BLOOD LEVEL; CORRELATION ANALYSIS; DIABETES MELLITUS; FEMALE; GLYCEMIC CONTROL; HEALTH CARE QUALITY; HEALTH CARE SYSTEM; HUMAN; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; MEDICAL RECORD REVIEW; OUTCOME VARIABLE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUALITY ADJUSTED LIFE YEAR; RISK ASSESSMENT; RISK REDUCTION; SYSTOLIC BLOOD PRESSURE;

AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; CROSS-SECTIONAL STUDIES; DIABETES MELLITUS; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; QUALITY INDICATORS, HEALTH CARE; QUALITY-ADJUSTED LIFE YEARS; RETROSPECTIVE STUDIES; UNITED STATES;

EID: 33846935780     PISSN: 13534505     EISSN: 14643677     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/intqhc/mzl064     Document Type: Article

References (31)

1. National Committee for Quality Assurance. What's in it and Why it Matters. Washington, DC: NCQA, 1999.
2. Hurtado MP, Swift EK, Corrigan JM. Institute of Medicine, Envisioning the National Healthcare Quality Report Designing the National Healthcare Quality Report. Washington, DC: National Academy Press, 2001.
3. American Diabetes Association. Economic costs of diabetes in the US in 2002. Diabetes Care 2003; 26: 917-932.
4. Kerr EA, Gerzoff RB, Krein SL et al. Diabetes care quality in the veterans affairs health care system and commercial managed care: The TRIAD study. Ann Intern Med 2004; 141: 272-281.
5. National Quality Forum: http://www.qualityforum.org Accessed 12 November 2006.
6. Vijan S, Hofer TP, Hayward RA. Estimated benefits of glycemic control in microvascular complications in type 2 diabetes. Ann Intern Med 1997; 127: 788-795.
7. CDC Diabetes Cost-effectiveness Group. Cost effectiveness of intensive glycemic control, intensified hypertension control, and serum cholesterol level reduction for type 2 diabetes. JAMA 2002;287:2542-2551.
8. Eastman RC, Javitt JC, Herman WH et al. Model of complications of NIDDM. II. Analysis of the health benefits and cost-effectiveness of treating NIDDM with the goal of normoglycemia. Diabetes Care 1997; 20: 735-744.
9. Kerr EA, Krein SL, Vijan S, Hofer TP, Hayward RA. Avoiding pitfalls in chronic disease quality measurement: A case for the next generation of technical quality measures. Am J Manag Care 2001;7:1033-1043.
10. Resource utilization and costs of care in the diabetes control and complications trial. Diabetes Care 1995; 11: 1468-1478.
11. Field M, Lohr KN. Institute of Medicine. Guidefines for Clinical Practice: From Development to Use. Washington, DC: Institute of Medicine National Academy Press, 1992.
12. Murray CJ, Ezzati M, Lopez AD, Rodgers A, Vander Hoorn S. Comparative quantification of health risks conceptual framework and methodological issues. Popul Health Metr 2003; 14: 1. Available from http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender. fcgi?tool=pubmed&pubmedid=12780936 Accessed 12 November 2006.
13. Murray CJ, Lauer JA, Hutubessy RC et al. Effectiveness and costs of interventions to lower systolic blood pressure and cholesterol: A global and regional analysis on reduction of cardiovascular disease risk. Lancet 2003; 261: 717-725.
14. Gold MR, Siegel JE, Russell LB, Weinstein MC. Cost-Effectiveness in Health and Medicine. New York, NY: Oxford University Press, 1996.
15. Pogach L, Rajan M, Aron D. Aligning performance measurement with clinical epidemiology: Comparison of weighted performance measurement and dichotomous thresholds for glycemic control in the Veterans Health Administration. Diabetes Care 2006; 29: 241-246.
16. UK Prospective Diabetes Study (UKPDS) Group. Tight blood pressure control and risk of macrovascular and microvascular complications in type 2 diabetes (UKPDS 38). BMJ 1998; 317:703-713.
17. Adler AI, Stratton IM, Neil HA et al. Association of systolic blood pressure with macrovascular and microvascular complications of type 2 diabetes (UKPDS 36): Prospective observational study. BMJ 2000; 321: 412-419.
18. Influence of pravastatin and plasma lipids on clinical events in the West of Scotland Coronary Prevention Study (WOSCOPS). Circulation 1998; 97: 1440-1445.
19. UK Prospective Diabetes Study (UKPDS) Group. Intensive blood-glucose control with sulphonylureas or insulin compared with conventional treatment and risk of complications in patients with type 2 diabetes (UKPDS 33). Lancet 1998; 352: 837-853.
20. National Committee for Quality Assurance. HEDIS 2001. Washington, DC: NCQA, 2001: Vol. 1.
21. McGlynn EA, Asch SM, Adams J et al. The quality of health care delivered to adults in the United States. N Engl J Med 2003; 348: 2635-2645.
22. National Committee for Quality Assurance Report Cards: http://hprc.ncqa.org/menu.asp Accessed 12 November 2006.
23. Zhang Q, Safford M, Pogach L. Performance status of health care facilities changes with risk adjustment of hemoglobin A1c. Diabetes Care 2000; 23: 919-927.
24. Amundsen G, Wehrle D. HealthPartners: 2004 Clinical Indicators Report: http://www.healthpartners.com/files/24880.pdf Accessed 12 November 2006.
25. Berwick DM, James B, Coye MJ. Connections between quality measurement and improvement. Med Care 2003; 41 (suppl.): I30-I38.
26. National Committee for Quality Assurance. Bridges to Excellence: Rewarding Quality across the Healthcare System: http://www.bridgestoexcellence.org/physicians/dcl.htm Accessed 12 November 2006.
27. Kerr EA, Smith DM, Hogan MM et al. Building a better quality measure: Are some patient's with 'poor quality' actually getting good care? Med Care 2003; 41: 1173-1182.
28. Hayward RA, Kent DM, Vijan S, Hofer TP. Multivariable risk prediction can greatly enhance the statistical power of clinical trial subgroup analysis. BMC Med Res Methodol 2006; 6: 18.
29. Engelgau MM. Trying to predict the future for people with diabetes: A tough but important task. Ann Intern Med 2005; 143: 301-302.
30. Thompson W, Wang H, Xie M et al. Assessing quality of diabetes care by measuring longitudinal changes in hemoglobin A1c in the veteran affairs health administration. Health Serv Res 2005; 40: 1818-1835.
31. Hofer TP, Hayward RA, Greenfield S, Wagner EH, Kaplan SH, Manning WG. The unreliability of individual physician 'report cards' for assessing the cost and quality of care of a chronic disease. JAMA 1999; 281: 2098-2105.