Quantification of quality: a commentary

The literature is replete with theoretical discussions of medical quality management, particularly of the measurement of quality in the health care setting. While there is a growing body of knowledge on both quality and its measurement, this author questions whether medical quality can ever be quantified. He says that the concept of quality is still a moving target, so that the value of attempts at quantification can only be short-lived.     

The electronic medical record system: health care marvel or morass?

The author considers the potential advantages and disadvantages, as well as possible unintended consequences, of introducing electronic medical record systems in health care organizations. Special consideration is given to the issues such information systems raise concerning privacy, confidentiality, and quality of care from both patient and provider perspectives. The potential gains from computerizing medical records include the benefit of instantaneous availability of patients' medical history, treatment regimes, and current health status in routine and emergency clinical situations. Ease of access to this information should reduce adverse outcomes. The added value of a complete and up-to-date medical record immediately available to medical caregivers seems undeniable. The potential disadvantages include issues around patient confidentiality and unauthorized access to records, the enormous capital investment for computer hardware, and system maintenance.     

Quality management in ambulatory care: the future is now

Ambulatory care has always been a stepchild. Hospitals have been and are the focal point of quality activity. Traditionally driven by Joint Commission decree and more recently inspired by market forces, hospitals find the resources to do quality. It was quality assurance in the '80s. It is quality management in the '90s. Some of this activity has oozed out into ambulatory care, but not much. We in ambulatory care have been too busy producing as many patient visits as possible in an environment of limited resources. All that is now changing. As ambulatory care becomes more and more important in the overall health care delivery scheme, medical quality management in this environment will also take on greater significance. Leading the way will be the electronic medical record.     

Formatting and presenting quality data to medical staffs and hospital boards

A host of historical and practical precedents have made hospitals responsible for the quality of care rendered within their facilities. The medical staff and the board of trustees share in this responsibility. Increasing demands for demonstrative evidence of the quality of care in an institution have made the process data-based. There is no substitute for specific data on the performance of both the hospital and its providers in the delivery of care. The trick, however, is in presenting this information to the medical staff and the board in a fashion that will be understandable and that will still maintain confidentiality of provider and patient. The authors offer a presentation system that has met with success in their community hospital.     

Practice standards use with internal partners

U.S. Department of Defense experience with internal partnership programs has indicated that a lack of close supervision by medical treatment facilities can result in cost increases. The use of medical practice guidelines or standards is the subject of active investigation. The global guidelines tend to be too rigid or too vague to affect the provision of care. Their general acceptance can often be low. The use of clinical guidelines, with supervision by a clinic peer, has been determined to be a provider-friendly method of delivering cost-effective, high-quality care. Comparisons were made between the supervised partners against the total expenditures for ENT outpatient CHAMPUS care. The results indicated not only a savings but a reduction in the rate of cost increases by more than 250 percent. It is our feeling that specialty provider, peer-directed medical standards can be applied in a cost-effective manner. Their adoption as an organization-wide standard for referral can be an important tool in maintaining quality while containing costs.     

Is leadership born or made?

Is leadership born or made? By profiling three colleagues who made the transition from clinician to top-flight executive in a health care organization, the author provides case studies from which to discuss leadership issues. An evolutionary pattern has developed with respect to physicians changing careers: The first model was the medical director, followed by the vice president for medical affairs, and finally the move to managing the health care system, group practice, or managed care organization. Are physician executives fundamentally different from clinicians in terms of leadership characteristics? What are the essential qualities needed to lead health care organizations? These questions are explored in-depth.     

Reporting quality of health care to the board

The reporting of quality of health care to the governing board has long been an enigma. Now we are in the midst of a revolution in health care, as we shift our focus from solely the clinical performance of individuals to a broader scope of assessing and improving all activities around patient services and patient care--i.e., management outcomes integrated with clinical outcomes to help identify opportunities to improve patient care. In addition, apprised of corporate liability for the quality of care provided in health care organizations, governing boards are raising questions and demanding more information. To maintain this high degree of interest in quality of health care, information should be restricted to what the board needs to know. This article will be confined to the hospital's organizationwide quality system of monitoring and evaluating. While medical staff credentialing and privileging are also board responsibilities and quality management activities should be used in the privileging and credentialing process, they will not be addressed in this article.     

TQM in health care: mistaken identity?

Total Quality Management is a powerful tool in health care today. The definition of quality improvement in the medical literature focuses on improving patient outcomes. However, most quality initiatives in the health care field focus on improving productivity, cost-effectiveness, market share, employee morale, and efficiencies of processes. This disparity between the medical definition of quality and the actual application of quality improvement may have the effect of alienating many physicians, the very people who must be involved. The semantics are important to address in a TQM initiative.     

Quality improvement in the era of health reform

More and more scrutiny is certain for the health care field. The intense interest in medical quality management that has been a factor in the field for many years is certain to increase under any reform that the system undergoes. This is a unique opportunity for physician executives to play a leading role in the future course of health care delivery. The alternative of their involvement will be almost total control of the issue by regulators.     

Managing health care quality.

Using the cited principles of professional staff credentialing and quality assurance, a department chairman, medical director, or other health care executive will be in an excellent position to assess quality of care against established standards and manage problems in the routine provision of medically appropriate care. He or she will also be able to assure the hospital's board that the hospital and its medical staff are well positioned to meet future challenges to provide effective quality, utilization, and risk management.     

Strategic issues requiring public accountability: food for thought

Although the exact outline of U.S. health reform has become fuzzy because of political events, it seems clear that major changes in the manner in which health care is delivered and financed are under way. The initiative for the most part has been assumed by state government and by the health care field itself, as managed care becomes ever more entrenched and the health care system becomes ever more integrated. An expected outcome of these changes will be demands for greater public accountability on the part of health care providers and organizations. In this article, the author discusses some of the issues--professional compensation, documenting community service, ensuring public input into planning efforts, economic credentialing and quality of care, and managing ethics under managed competition--that will have to be addressed at the local level as these shifts take place.     

Primary care: the driver in health care reform

The changes occurring in the health care industry have resulted in a cost-quality competition that has not been present in the past. Because of this competition, managed care is a growing way of financing and providing health care to the people of the United States. Managed care depends heavily on competent primary care physicians. Because primary care physicians are in short supply, the status and financial rewards of primary care practice are increasing. The primary care physician will be the dominant force in medical practice in the immediate future. He or she is capable in a managed setting of resolving the perceived problems of the health care industry in responding to the drivers of health care reform. Costs are reduced while quality is maintained. Access to health care is improved, and fragmentation of health care is significantly lessened.     

Making a match: inexperienced physician executives and the job market

Hospitals and other health care organizations are adding physician executives at such a rate that demand is outstripping supply-there are more opportunities for seasoned physician executives than there are physicians with track records as medical managers. It is possible that hiring management will have to consider the employment of a physician who wants to be in management but has no track record as a physician executive. In some cases, it may even be preferable to employ a neophyte physician executive, especially when the physician is a respected clinician already on the organization's medical staff. In selecting such a physician, however, an evaluation must be made of the probability that the physician will be successful in the new role. The author points to 10 criteria that the hiring organization should observe in hiring inexperienced managers.     

Quality assurance in the ambulatory care setting.

One of the most utilitarian developments in the field of quality assurance in health care has been the introduction of industrial concepts of quality management. These concepts, coupled with buyer demand for accountability, are bringing new perspectives to health care quality assurance. These perspectives provide a new view of quality assurance as a major responsibility and strategic opportunity for management; a competitive and marketable commodity; and a method of improving safety, effectiveness, and satisfaction with medical care.     

The Informatics Institute: why do we need it?

Why should physician executives care about medical informatics? For that matter, what is medical informatics anyway? Broadly defined, medical informatics is the study of the collection, storage, retrieval, and analysis of data and information in health care to support clinical and administrative decision making. Informatics is important because, in the past 10 years, powerful computer, software, and information technologies have been developed to enable health care organizations to automate some of the work of decision making, for improved quality of care and cost control, and for successful managed care contracting. This new emphasis on informatics in health care was the impetus for the founding by ACPE earlier this year of The Informatics Institute, which will be involved in educational and research activities in the growing area of medical informatics. In this new column in Physician Executive, Dr. Marshall Ruffin, President and CEO of the Institute, will discuss the role of medical informatics in health care delivery and financing and its relation to physician executives.     

When push comes to shove: implementing VBAC practice guidelines

The dramatic increase in U.S. cesarean sections over the past two decades has been significantly driven by repeat C-sections. In response to this trend, clinical guidelines recommending vaginal birth after cesarean-section (VBAC) have been promulgated by national organizations. Adherence to these guidelines would reduce the number of repeat C-sections, lower the overall C-section rate, and improve both the quality and the cost of health care. While these guidelines have received professional endorsement, their implementation has been clouded by issues of patient acceptance and provider payment. To examine implementation of these guidelines by health care organizations, the authors surveyed 156 members of the American College of Physician Executives to determine their policies, practices, and attitudes toward VBAC guidelines. Those surveyed generally were medical directors in HMOs, hospitals, and other practice settings. The findings indicate that the health care organizations represented by these physician executives have not consistently implemented VBAC guideline and that they are reluctant to hold physicians, their patients, or hospitals accountable for the financial, utilization, and quality impact of the elective decision ot to pursue appropriate VBACs. We conclude that, even when widely accepted, clinical practice guidelines may be ineffective in reducing the costs or improving the quality of medical care.     

Cost pressures will force sharper definition of quality.

Much of the turmoil in the health care field is a direct result of pressures for reductions in health care costs. Many, particularly physicians, are concerned about the impact of cost-driven changes on the quality of care. The author of this article proposes five criteria that can serve as a structure on which to build a consensus for defining quality.     

The Role of Clinical and Process Quality in Achieving Patient Satisfaction in Hospitals

Managers constantly struggle with where to allocate their resources and efforts in managing the complex service delivery system called a hospital. In the broadest sense, their decisions and actions focus on two important aspects of health care—clinical or technical medical care that emphasizes “what” the patient receives and process performance that emphasizes “how” health care services are delivered to patients. Here, we investigate the role of leadership, clinical quality, and process quality on patient satisfaction. A causal model is hypothesized and evaluated using structural equation modeling for a sample of 202 U.S. hospitals. Statistical results support the idea that leadership is a good exogenous construct and that clinical and process quality are good intermediate outcomes in determining patient satisfaction. Statistical results also suggest that hospital leadership has more influence on process quality than on clinical quality, which is predominantly the doctors' domain. Other results are discussed, such as that hospital managers must be mindful of the fact that process quality is at least as important as clinical quality in predicting patient satisfaction. The article concludes by proposing areas for future research.     

Management must role for physicians

It is not the same subject that was projected in the '70s when quality assurance leaped on the health care scene. As complex as quality assurance is, contemporary discussions of quality are much more multifaceted. At the core of health care quality, however, is clinical practice. The consensus among speakers at the College's National Conference of Physician Executives in May in San Antonio, Tex., is that medical quality will not be managed in the interests of patients, buyers, and providers in the absence of significant involvement by physician executives.     

Addressing medical errors: the key to a safer health care system

A recent report on patient safety by the Institute of Medicine's Committee on Quality of Health Care in America noted that there are at least 44,000 patient deaths from medical errors each year, placing them as the eighth leading cause of death in the United States. They occur in every aspect of the practice of medicine. Some result in adverse events that harm patients. Can an organized effort to reduce medical errors be effective? Other complex industries have been successful in reducing errors and improving quality. The IOM report argues that the medical community must do the same to ensure a higher quality of care. Both the Clinton administration and Congress have expressed concerns about the frequency of medical errors, as has organized medicine. These findings raise significant policy questions for physician executives' charges with ensuring patient safety.