Methods for Developing the American College of Rheumatology's Electronic Clinical Quality Measures

Arthritis Care and Research

Volumn 68, Issue 10, 2016, Pages 1402-1409

  Yazdany, Jinoos ^a   Myslinski, Rachel ^b   Miller, Amy ^b   Francisco, Melissa ^b   Desai, Sonali ^c   Schmajuk, Gabriela ^a   Lacaille, Diane ^d   Barber, Claire E ^e   Orozco, Catalina ^f   Bunyard, Matthew ^g   Bergman, Martin J ^h   Passo, Murray ⁱ   Matteson, Eric L ^j   Olson, Richard ^k   Silverman, Stuart ^l   Warren, Robert ⁱ   Nola, Kamala ^m   Robbins, Mark ⁿ  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^b American College of Rheumatology   (United States)

^c BRIGHAM AND WOMEN S HOSPITAL   (United States)

^d ARTHRITIS RESEARCH CENTRE OF CANADA   (Canada)

^e UNIVERSITY OF CALGARY   (Canada)

^f Rheumatology Associates   (United States)

^g LERNER RESEARCH INSTITUTE   (United States)

^h DREXEL UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OF MEDICINE   (United States)

ⁱ MEDICAL UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH CAROLINA   (United States)

^j Mayo Clinic College of Medicine   (United States)

^k Rockford Orthopedic Associates   (United States)

^l Osteoporosis Medical Center   (United States)

^m LIPSCOMB UNIVERSITY   (United States)

ⁿ HARVARD VANGUARD MEDICAL ASSOCIATES   (United States)

more..

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CLINICAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN; CONCURRENT VALIDITY; CONFLICT OF INTEREST; CONSENSUS DEVELOPMENT; DATA COLLECTION METHOD; ELECTRONIC CLINICAL QUALITY MEASURE; ELECTRONIC MEDICAL RECORD; FEASIBILITY STUDY; HEALTH CARE ORGANIZATION; HEALTH CARE PLANNING; HEALTH CARE QUALITY; HUMAN; MEDICAL DOCUMENTATION; METHODOLOGY; PUBLIC OPINION; QUALITY CONTROL PROCEDURES; RELIABILITY; STATISTICAL ANALYSIS; STUDY DESIGN; TOTAL QUALITY MANAGEMENT;

EID: 84988975701     PISSN: 2151464X     EISSN: 21514658     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/acr.22985     Document Type: Article

References (26)

1. Schmajuk G, Trivedi AN, Solomon DH, Yelin E, Trupin L, Chakravarty EF, et al. Receipt of disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs among patients with rheumatoid arthritis in Medicare managed care plans. JAMA 2011;305:480–6.
2. Desai SP, Yazdany J. Quality measurement and improvement in rheumatology: rheumatoid arthritis as a case study. Arthritis Rheum 2011;63:3649–60.
3. Institute of Medicine. Best care at lower cost: the path to continuously learning health care in America. Washington (DC): National Academies Press; 2013.
4. McGlynn EA, Schneider EC, Kerr EA. Reimagining quality measurement. N Engl J Med 2014;371:2150–3.
5. Garrido T, Kumar S, Lekas J, Lindberg M, Kadiyala D, Whippy A, et al. E-measures: insight into the challenges and opportunities of automating publicly reported quality measures. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2014;21:181–4.
6. Gardner W, Morton S, Byron SC, Tinoco A, Canan BD, Leonhart K, et al. Using computer-extracted data from electronic health records to measure the quality of adolescent well-care. Health Serve Res 2014;49:1226–48.
7. National Quality Forum. Guidance for measure testing and evaluating scientific acceptability of measure properties. 2011. URL: http://www.qualityforum.org/docs/measure_evaluation_criteria.aspx.
8. Saag KG, Yazdany J, Alexander C, Caplan L, Coblyn J, Desai SP, et al. Defining quality of care in rheumatology: the American College of Rheumatology white paper on quality measurement. Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken) 2011;63:2–9.
9. National Quality Forum. Measure Prioritization Advisory Committee report. Prioritization of high-impact Medicare conditions and measure gaps. 2010 URL: http://www.qualityforum.org/projects/prioritization.aspx.
10. Singh JA, Hodges JS, Toscano JP, Asch SM. Quality of care for gout in the US needs improvement. Arthritis Rheum 2007;57:822–9.
11. Singh JA. Quality of life and quality of care for patients with gout. Curr Rheum Report 2009;11:154–60.
12. Mikuls TR. Quality of care in gout: from measurement to improvement. Clin Exp Rheumatol 2007;25 Suppl 47:114–9.
13. Singh JA, Furst DE, Bharat A, Curtis JR, Kavanaugh AF, Kremer JM, et al. 2012 update of the 2008 American College of Rheumatology recommendations for the use of disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs and biologic agents in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis. Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken) 2012;64:625–39.
14. Khanna D, Khanna PP, Fitzgerald JD, Singh MK, Bae S, Neogi T, et al. 2012 American College of Rheumatology guidelines for management of gout. Part 2: therapy and antiinflammatory prophylaxis of acute gouty arthritis. Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken) 2012;64:1447–61.
15. Grossman JM, Gordon R, Ranganath VK, Deal C, Caplan L, Chen W, et al. American College of Rheumatology 2010 recommendations for the prevention and treatment of glucocorticoid-induced osteoporosis. Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken) 2010;62:1515–26.
16. Bell BG, Spencer R, Avery AJ, Campbell SM. Tools for measuring patient safety in primary care settings using the RAND/UCLA appropriateness method. BMC Fam Pract 2014;15:110.
17. Lawson EH, Gibbons MM, Ko CY, Shekelle PG. The appropriateness method has acceptable reliability and validity for assessing overuse and underuse of surgical procedures. J Clin Epidemiol 2012;65:1133–43.
18. Chronaki C, Jaffe C, Dolin B. eMeasures: a standard format for health quality measures. Stud Health Technol Inform 2011;169:989–91.
19. Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. Measure authoring tool user guide. 2014. URL: http://www.emeasuretool.cms.gov/documents/10179/13108/MAT+User+Guide/c50cc2fb-01ee-4b97-9cd1-2e33feca8763.
20. National Quality Forum. eMeasure feasibility assessment: technical report. 2015. URL: http://www.qualityforum.org/Projects/e-g/eMeasures/Electronic_Quality_Measures.aspx.
21. Briggs JB, Weiner J, Chan K, Kind E, Awwad S. Performance measures using electronic health records: five case studies. New York: The Commonwealth Fund; 2009. URL: http://www.commonwealthfund.org/publications/fund-reports/2008/may/performance-measures-using-electronic-health-records-five-case-studies.
22. Landis JR, Koch GG. The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometr 1977;33:159–74.
23. Parker SL, McGirt MJ, Bekelis K, Holland CM, Davies J, Devin CJ, et al. The National Neurosurgery Quality and Outcomes Database Qualified Clinical Data Registry: 2015 measure specifications and rationale. Neurosurg Focus 2015;39:E4.
24. Bhatt DL, Drozda JP Jr, Shahian DM, Chan PS, Fonarow GC, Heidenreich PA, et al. ACC/AHA/STS statement on the future of registries and the performance measurement enterprise: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Performance Measures and The Society of Thoracic Surgeons. Ann Throac Surg 2015;100:1926–41.
25. Burwell SM. Setting value-based payment goals: HHS efforts to improve U.S. health care. N Engl J Med 2015;372:897–9.
26. National Quality Forum. Quality data model. 2012. URL: https://ecqi.healthit.gov/system/files/qdm/qdm_122012.pdf.