Literature DB >> 11112730

Measuring contributions to the clinical mission of medical schools and teaching hospitals.

R M D'Alessandri1, P Albertsen, B F Atkinson, R M Dickler, R F Jones, D G Kirch, D E Longnecker, E R McAnarney, V M Parisi, S E Selby, J S Stapczynski, J W Thompson, A G Wasserman, K L Zuza.   

Abstract

This is the final report of a panel convened as part of the Association of American Medical College's (AAMC's) Mission-based Management Program to examine the use of metrics (i.e., measures) in assessing faculty and departmental contributions to the clinical mission. The authors begin by focusing on methods employed to estimate clinical effort and calculate a "clinical full-time equivalent," a prerequisite to comparing productivity among faculty members and departments. They then identify commonly used metrics, including relative-value units, total patient-care gross charges, total net patient fee-for-service revenue, total volume per CPT (current procedural terminologies) code by service category and number of patients per physician, discussing their advantages and disadvantages. These measures reflect the "twin pillars" of measurement criteria, those based on financial or revenue information, and those based on measured activity. In addition, the authors urge that the assessment of quality of care become more highly developed and integrated into an institution's measurement criteria. The authors acknowledge the various ways users of clinical metrics can develop standards against which to benchmark performance. They identify organizations that are sources of information about external national standards, acknowledge various factors that confound the interpretation of productivity data, and urge schools to identify and measure secondary service indicators to assist with interpretation and provide a fuller picture of performance. Finally, they discuss other, non-patient-care, activities that contribute to the clinical mission, information about which should be incorporated into the overall assessment. In summary, the authors encourage the use of clinical productivity metrics as an integral part of a comprehensive evaluation process based upon clearly articulated and agreed-upon goals and objectives. When carefully designed, these measurement systems can provide critical information that will enable institutional leaders to recognize and reward faculty and departmental performance in fulfillment of the clinical mission.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2000        PMID: 11112730     DOI: 10.1097/00001888-200012000-00025

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Acad Med        ISSN: 1040-2446            Impact factor:   6.893


  5 in total

Review 1.  Capturing Psychologists' Work in Integrated Care: Measuring and Documenting Administrative Outcomes.

Authors:  Lisa K Kearney; Clifford A Smith; Andrew S Pomerantz
Journal:  J Clin Psychol Med Settings       Date:  2015-12

2.  The role of remuneration in clinical productivity of paediatric physicians.

Authors:  Sanober S Motiwala; Peter C Coyte
Journal:  Paediatr Child Health       Date:  2010-03       Impact factor: 2.253

Review 3.  Capturing Psychologists' Work in Academic Health Settings: The Role of the Educational Value Unit (EVU).

Authors:  Eugene J D'Angelo; Katie Gallagher
Journal:  J Clin Psychol Med Settings       Date:  2016-03

4.  Challenges of measuring a faculty member activity in medical schools.

Authors:  A Mohammadi; R Mojtahedzadeh; S H Emami Razavi
Journal:  Iran Red Crescent Med J       Date:  2011-03-01       Impact factor: 0.611

5.  A model for evaluation of faculty members' activities based on meta-evaluation of a 5-year experience in medical school.

Authors:  Aeen Mohammadi; Kamran Soltani Arabshahi; Rita Mojtahedzadeh; Mohammad Jalili; Hossein Keshavarz Valian
Journal:  J Res Med Sci       Date:  2015-06       Impact factor: 1.852

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.