Calculations of financial incentives for providers in a pay-for-performance program: Manual review versus data from structured fields in electronic health records

Medical Care

Volumn 53, Issue 10, 2015, Pages 901-907

  Urech, Tracy H ^a   Woodard, Lechauncy D ^a   Virani, Salim S ^a   Dudley, R Adams ^b   Lutschg, Meghan Z ^a   Petersen, Laura A ^a  

^a BAYLOR COLLEGE OF MEDICINE   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

Incentives; Payment system design; Performance measurement

Indexed keywords

ANTIHYPERTENSIVE AGENT;

ANTIHYPERTENSIVE THERAPY; ARTICLE; BLOOD PRESSURE; CALCULATION; CROSS-SECTIONAL STUDY; DATA ANALYSIS; ELECTRONIC MEDICAL RECORD; FINANCIAL INCENTIVE; FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT; HEALTH CARE COST; HUMAN; HYPERTENSION; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MEDICAL FEE; MEDICAL RECORD; PAY FOR PERFORMANCE PROGRAM; PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT SYSTEM; PHYSICIAN; PRACTICE GUIDELINE; PRIMARY MEDICAL CARE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; REIMBURSEMENT; VETERANS HEALTH; ELECTRONIC HEALTH RECORD; INFORMATION PROCESSING; MOTIVATION; PROCEDURES; PROTOCOL COMPLIANCE; PUBLIC HOSPITAL; STATISTICS AND NUMERICAL DATA;

ANTIHYPERTENSIVE AGENTS; CROSS-SECTIONAL STUDIES; DATA COLLECTION; ELECTRONIC HEALTH RECORDS; GUIDELINE ADHERENCE; HOSPITALS, VETERANS; HUMANS; HYPERTENSION; MOTIVATION; PRACTICE GUIDELINES AS TOPIC; REIMBURSEMENT, INCENTIVE;

EID: 84941616689     PISSN: 00257079     EISSN: 15371948     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/MLR.0000000000000418     Document Type: Article

References (31)

1. Kern LM, Malhotra S, Barron Y, et al. Accuracy of electronically reported "meaningful use" clinical quality measures. Ann Intern Med. 2013;158:77-83.
2. Parsons A, McCullough C, Wang J, et al. Validity of electronic health record-derived quality measurement for performance monitoring. J Am Med Inform Ass. 2012;19:604-609.
3. Gardner W, Morton S, Byron SC, et al. Using computer-extracted data from electronic health records to measures the quality of adolescent well-care. Health Serv Res. 2014;49:1226-1248.
4. Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), HHS. Medicare and Medicaid programs: hospital outpatient prospective payment and ambulatory surgical center payment systems and quality reporting programs; Hospital Value-Based Purchasing Program; organ procurement organizations; quality improvement organizations; Electronic Health Records (EHR) Incentive Program; provider reimbursement determinations and appeals. Final rule with comment period and final rules. Fed Regist. 2013;78:74825-75200.
5. Adler-Milstein J, Des Roches CM, Furukawa MF, et al. More than half of US hospitals have at least a basic EHR, but stage 2 criteria remain challenging for most. Health Aff (Millwood). 2014;33:1664-1671.
6. Electronically specified clinical quality measures (eCQMs) reporting quality net. Available at: http://www.qualitynet.org. Accessed March 25, 2015.
7. Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services Physician Quality Reporting System (PQRS) Overview. Available at: http://www.cms.gov/Medicare/Quality-Initiatives-Patient-Assessment-Instruments/PQRS/Downloads/PQRS-OverviewFactSheet-2013-08-06.pdf. Accessed June 23, 2015.
8. Hartocollis A. New York City ties doctors' income to quality of care. New York Times. January 12, 2013:A1. Available at: http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/12/nyregion/new-york-city-hospitals-to-tiedoctorsperformance-pay-to-quality-measures.html?pagewanted=all&-r=2&. Accessed October 3, 2014.
9. New York City Health and Hospitals Corporation. HHC Signs Contract for New Electronic Medical Record System to Span City's Entire Public Hospital System (press release, dated January 16, 2013). Available at: http://www.nyc.gov/html/hhc/html/news/press-release-2013-01-16-medical-records-contract.shtml. Accessed June 23, 2015.
10. Integrated Health Association (IHA). Integrated Health Association (IHA) Pay for Performance (P4P) Program Fact Sheet. Available at: http://www.iha.org/pdfs-documents/p4p-california/P4P-Fact-Sheet-September-2014.pdf. Accessed October 3, 2014.
11. Petersen LA, Urech T, Simpson K, et al. Design, rationale, and baseline characteristics of a cluster randomized controlled trial of pay for performance for hypertension treatment: study protocol. Implement Sci. 2011;6:114.
12. Petersen LA, Simpson K, Pietz K, et al. Effects of individual physicianlevel and practice-level financial incentives on hypertension care: a randomized trial. JAMA. 2013;310:1042-1050.
13. Hysong SJ, Simpson K, Pietz K, et al. Financial incentives and physician commitment to guideline-recommended hypertension management. Am J Manage Care. 2012;18:e378-e391.
14. Chobanian AV, Bakris GL, Black HR, et al. National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute Joint National Committee on Prevention, Detection, Evaluation, and Treatment of High Blood Pressure; National High Blood Pressure Education Program Coordinating Committee. The Seventh Report of the Joint National Committee on Prevention, Detection, Evaluation, and Treatment of High Blood Pressure: the JNC 7 report. JAMA. 2003;289:2560-2572.
15. Brown SH, Lincoln MJ, Groen PJ, et al. VistA-US Department of Veterans Affairs national-scale HIS. Int J Med Inform. 2003;69:135-156.
16. Department of Veterans Affairs Office of Enterprise Development. VistA-HealtheVet Monograph. Available at: http://www.va.gov/vista-monograph/docs/2008-2009-vistahealthevet-monograph-fc-0309.pdf. Accessed August 28, 2014.
17. Fihn SD, Francis J, Clancy C, et al. Insights from advanced analytics at the Veterans Health Administration. Health Aff. 2014;33:1203-1211.
18. Hynes DM, Perrin RA, Rappaport S, et al. Informatics resources to support health care quality improvement in the Veterans Health Administration. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2004;11:344-350.
19. Smith MW, Joseph GJ. Pharmacy data in the VA health care system. Med Care Res Rev. 2003;60:92S-123S.
20. Department of Veterans Affairs Health Economics Resource Center (HERC). Non-VA medical care (formerly fee basis files). Available at: http://www.herc.research.va.gov/include/page.asp?id = non-va. Accessed March 25, 2015.
21. Department of Veterans Affairs. VHA Directive 2010-019: access to Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) data for VHA users within the VA information technology (IT) systems. Available at: http://www.va.gov/vhapublications/ViewPublication.asp?pub-ID= 2228. Accessed September 15, 2014.
22. Department of Veterans Affairs. VHA Directive 2008-084: National Clinical Reminders. Available at: http://www.va.gov/vhapublications/ViewPublication.asp?pub-ID= 1815. Accessed September 3, 2014.
23. Cicchetti DV, Feinstein AR. High agreement but low kappa: II. Resolving the paradoxes. J Clin Epidemiol. 1990;43:551-558.
24. Chen G, Faris P, Hemmelgarn B, et al. Measuring agreement of administrative data with chart data using prevalence unadjusted and adjusted kappa. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2009;9:5.
25. Barbara AM, Loeb M, Dolovich L, et al. Patient self-report and medical records: Measuring agreement for binary data. Can Fam Physician. 2011;57:737-738.
26. Cohen J. A coefficient of agreement for nominal scales. Edu and Psychol Meas. 1960;20:37-46.
27. Landis JR, Koch GG. The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics. 1977;33:159-174.
28. Persell SD, Wright JM, Thompson JA, et al. Assessing the validity of national quality measures for coronary artery disease using an electronic health record. Arch Intern Med. 2006;166:2272-2277.
29. Borzecki AM, Wong AT, Hickey EC, et al. Can we use automated data to assess quality of hypertension care? Am J Manag Care. 2004;10:473-479.
30. Baker DW, Persell SD, Thompson JA, et al. Automated review of electronic health records to assess quality of care for outpatients with heart failure. Ann Intern Med. 2007;146:270-277.
31. Garrido T, Kumar S, Lekas J, et al. e-Measures: insight into the challenges and opportunities of automating publicly reported quality measures. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2014;21:181-184.