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.
- HCA to Acquire CareNow Urgent Care Centers
- Dental Board Case Before SCOTUS Has Far-Reaching Implications
- BCBS Tries New Drug Contracting Model
- Abington Health, Jefferson Health Plan '100% Equal' Merger
- 76% of Physicians Don't Like CMS Quality Reporting Programs
- The Case for Recycling Surgical Supplies
- Federal Appeals Court Mulls Observation Status
- Ballot Initiative Pits Providers Against Payers in SD
- How the Military's EHR Reboot Will Impact Interoperability
- Aetna Cuts 4 New Accountable Care Deals