Metric-driven harm: An exploration of unintended consequences of performance measurement

Applied Nursing Research

Volumn 26, Issue 4, 2013, Pages 269-272

  Rambur, Betty ^a   Vallett, Carol ^b   Cohen, Judith A ^a   Tarule, Jill Mattuck ^b  

^a University of Vermont   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF VERMONT   (United States)

Author keywords

Metric driven harm; Performance measurement; Public reporting of health care outcomes; Quality improvement; Unintended consequences

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; HEALTH CARE QUALITY; HEALTH SERVICES RESEARCH; METRIC-DRIVEN HARM; NONBIOLOGICAL MODEL; PATIENT CARE; PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT; PUBLIC REPORTING OF HEALTH CARE OUTCOMES; TOTAL QUALITY MANAGEMENT; UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES;

METRIC-DRIVEN HARM; PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT; PUBLIC REPORTING OF HEALTH CARE OUTCOMES; QUALITY IMPROVEMENT; UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES;

MODELS, ORGANIZATIONAL; ORGANIZATIONAL CASE STUDIES; PATIENT-CENTERED CARE; QUALITY OF HEALTH CARE;

EID: 84887619314     PISSN: 08971897     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.apnr.2013.09.001     Document Type: Article

References (33)

1. Bardach N., Wang J., DeLeon S., Shih S., Boscardin W.J., Goldman L.E., Dudley A. Effects of pay-for-performance incentives on quality of care in small practices with electronic health records: A randomized trial. JAMA 2013, 310(10):1051-1059.
2. Bevan G., Hood C. What's measured is what matters: Targets and gaming in the English public health care system. Public Administration 2006, 84(3):517-538.
3. Calikoglu S., Murray R., Feeney D. Hospital pay-for-performance programs in Maryland produced strong results, including reduced hospital-acquired conditions. Health Affairs 2012, 31(12):2649-2658. 10.1377/hlthaff.2012.0357.
4. Cameron K., Bright D., Caza A. Exploring the relationship between organizational virtuousness and performance. American Behavioral Scientist 2004, 47(6):766-790.
5. Cohen J.A., Tarule J.M., Rambur B.A., Vallett C. Stress and the workplace. Handbook of Stress, Coping, and Health: Implications for Nursing Research, Theory, and Practice 2011, 310.
6. Corley M.C. Nurse moral distress: A proposed theory and research agenda. Nursing Ethics 2002, 9(6):636-650. 10.1191/0969733002ne557oa.
7. Fenton J.J., Jerant A.F., Bertakis K.D., Franks P. The cost of satisfaction. Archives of Internal Medicine 2012, 172:405-411.
8. Friedberg J., Van Busum K., Wexler R., Bowen M., Schneider E. A demonstration of shared decision making in primary care highlights barriers to adoption and potential remedies. Health Affairs 2013, 32:268-275.
9. Ganz D., Wenger N., Rother C., Kamberg D., Change J., MacLean C. The effects of a quality improvement initiative on the quality of other aspects of health care: The law of unintended consequences?. Medical Care 2007, 45(1):8-18.
10. Gillam S.J., Siriwardena A.N., Steel N. Pay-for-performance in the United Kingdom: Impact of the quality and outcomes framework-A systematic review. The Annals of Family Medicine 2012, 10(5):461-468.
11. Huynh T, Kleerup E, Wiley J, Savitsky T, Guise D, Garger B, Wenger N. The frequency and cost of treatment perceived to be futile in critical care. JAMA Internal Medicine, doi:10:1001/jamainternmed.2013:10261. Published online September 9, 2013.
12. Institutes of Medicine The future of nursing: Leading change, advancing health 2010, Author, Washington, DC.
13. Jha A.K., Joynt K.E., Orav E.J., Epstein A.M. The long-term effect of premier pay for performance on patient outcomes. New England Journal of Medicine 2012, 366(17):1606-1615.
14. Kanwar M., Brar N., Khatib R., Fakih M.G. Misdiagnosis of community-acquired pneumonia and inappropriate utilization of antibiotics: Side effects of the 4h antibiotic administration rule. Chest 2007, 131:1865-1869.
15. Knot U. Exploring the risk of unintended consequences of quality improvement efforts. Journal of the American College of Cardiology 2012, 60(9):812-813.
16. Kuhn M., Siciliani L. Performance indicators for quality with costly falsification. Journal of Economics & Management Strategy 2009, 18(4):1137-1154.
17. Lester H.E., Hannon K.L., Campbell S.M. Identifying unintended consequences of quality indicators: A qualitative study. BMJ Quality and Safety 2011, 20:1057-1060.
18. Mannion R., Braithwaithe J. Unintended consequences of performance measurement in healthcare; 20 salutary lessons from the English National Health Service. Internal Medicine Journal 2012, 569-574.
19. Marshall M., Shekelle P., Brook R., Leatherman S. Dying to know public release of information about quality of health care. DTIC document Retrieved from. http://oai.dtic.mil/oai/oai?verb=getRecord&metadataPrefix=html&identifier=ADA384942.
20. Marshall M., Shekelle P., Leatherman S., Brook R. The public release of performance data: What do we expect to gain? A review of the evidence. Journal of the American Medical Association 2000, 283(14):1866-1874.
21. McHugh M.D., Stimpfel A.W. Nurse reported quality of care: A measure of hospital quality. Research in Nursing & Health 2012, 35(6):566-575. 10.1002/nur.21503.
22. Ossege C. Accountability-Are we better off without it?: An empirical study on the effect of accountability on public managers' work behavior. Public Management Review 2012, 14(5):585-607.
23. Parker C., Schwamm L.H., Fonarow G.C., Smith E.E., Reeves M.J. Stroke quality metrics systematic reviews of the relationships to patient-centered outcomes and impact of public reporting. Stroke 2012, 43(1):155-162.
24. Petersen L., Simpson K., Pietz K., Urech T., Hysong S., Profit J., Conrad D., Dudley A. Effects of individual physician-level and practice level financial incentives on hypertension: A randomized trial. JAMA 2013, 310(10):1042-1050.
25. Powell A.A., White K.M., Partin M.R., Halek K., Christianson J.B., Neil B., et al. Unintended consequences of implementing a national performance measurement system into local practice. Journal of General Internal Medicine 2012, 27(4):405-412.
26. Pronovost P., Lilford R. A roadmap for improving the performance of performance measures. Health Affairs 2011, 30(4):569-573.
27. Rambur B.A., Vallett C.M., Cohen J.A., Tarule J.M. The moral cascade: Distress, eustress, and the virtuous organization. Journal of Organizational Moral Psychology 2010, 1(1):1-14.
28. Rest J. Longitudinal study of the defining issues test of moral judgment: A strategy for analyzing developmental change. Developmental Psychology 1975, 11(1):738-748.
29. Smith P. On the unintended consequences of publishing performance data in the public sector. International Journal of Public Administration 1995, 18(2-3):277-310.
30. Wachter R., Flander S., Fee C., Pronovost P. Public reporting of antibiotic timing in patients with pneumonia: Lessons from a flawed performance measure. Annals of Internal Medicine 2008, 149(1):20-32.
31. Welker J., Huston M., McCue J. Antibiotic timing an errors in diagnosing pneumonia. Archive of Internal Medicine 2008, 168(4):351-356.
32. Werner R., Asch D. The unintended consequences of publicly reporting quality information. Journal of the American Medical Association 2005, 293(10):1239-1244.
33. Woolhandler S., Ariely D. Will pay for performance backfire? Insights from behavioral economics. Health affairs (blog) October 20, 2012 retrieved from. http://healthaffairs.org/blog/2012/10/11will-pay-for-performance-backfire-insightsfrom-behavioraleconomics.