Pronovost: Surveillance Bias Threatens Quality Payment Fairness
2. Costs and benefits of proposed measures should include rational prioritization of which measures to mandate. "Policymakers could require a formal post hoc review evaluating the risks, benefits and harms of the outcome measures after implementation."
3. Performance measures could link a process of care with adverse outcomes when defining incidence of preventable harm. "When standardized surveillance is too costly or risky, processes of care among those sustaining the outcome could be examined. For example, what percentage of patients who develop a DVT (outcome) received appropriate risk assessment and prophylaxis (process)?"
Pronovost this month was named director of the newly established Armstrong Institute for Patient Safety and Quality at Johns Hopkins. He was simultaneously named Johns Hopkins Medicine’s senior vice president for patient safety and quality.
Cheryl Clark is senior quality editor and California correspondent for HealthLeaders Media. She is a member of the Association of Health Care Journalists.
- Resisting the Healthcare Consolidation Frenzy
- Give Nurses in Wheelchairs a Chance
- HL20: George Halvorson—Expectations for Success
- 3 Better Ways to Market Bariatric Surgery
- Top 3 Health Plan Game Changers of 2013
- AMCs React to Being Shut Out of Some Exchange Plans
- New G-Codes to Pay Doctors for Broad Array of Non-Face-to-Face Care
- MGMA Urges 'End-to-End' ICD-10 Testing
- Q&A: Ardis Dee Hoven 'Optimistic' SGR Will Be Repealed
- MUCking Around for New Quality Measures