Literature DB >> 15545677

Measuring the quality of physician practice by using clinical vignettes: a prospective validation study.

John W Peabody1, Jeff Luck, Peter Glassman, Sharad Jain, Joyce Hansen, Maureen Spell, Martin Lee.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Worldwide efforts are under way to improve the quality of clinical practice. Most quality measurements, however, are poorly validated, expensive, and difficult to compare among sites.
OBJECTIVE: To validate whether vignettes accurately measure the quality of clinical practice by using a comparison with standardized patients (the gold standard method), and to determine whether vignettes are a more or less accurate method than medical record abstraction.
DESIGN: Prospective, multisite study.
SETTING: Outpatient primary care clinics in 2 Veterans Affairs medical centers and 2 large, private medical centers. PARTICIPANTS: 144 of 163 eligible physicians agreed to participate, and, of these, 116 were randomly selected to see standardized patients, to complete vignettes, or both. MEASUREMENTS: Scores, expressed as the percentage of explicit quality criteria correctly completed, were obtained by using 3 methods.
RESULTS: Among all physicians, the quality of clinical practice as measured by the standardized patients was 73% correct (95% CI, 72.1% to 73.4%). By using exactly the same criteria, physicians scored 68% (CI, 67.9% to 68.9%) when measured by the vignettes but only 63% (CI, 62.7% to 64.0%) when assessed by medical record abstraction. These findings were consistent across all diseases and were independent of case complexity or physician training level. Vignettes also accurately measured unnecessary care. Finally, vignettes seem to capture the range in the quality of clinical practice among physicians within a site. LIMITATIONS: Despite finding variation in the quality of clinical practice, we did not determine whether poorer quality translated into worse health status for patients. In addition, the quality scores are based on measurements from 1 patient-provider interaction. As with all other scoring criteria, vignette criteria must be regularly updated.
CONCLUSIONS: Vignettes are a valid tool for measuring the quality of clinical practice. They can be used for diverse clinical settings, diseases, physician types, and situations in which case-mix variation is a concern. They are inexpensive and easy to use. Vignettes are particularly useful for comparing quality among and within sites and may be useful for longitudinal evaluations of interventions intended to change clinical practice.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2004        PMID: 15545677     DOI: 10.7326/0003-4819-141-10-200411160-00008

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ann Intern Med        ISSN: 0003-4819            Impact factor:   25.391


  233 in total

1.  Accuracy of a decision aid for advance care planning: simulated end-of-life decision making.

Authors:  Benjamin H Levi; Steven R Heverley; Michael J Green
Journal:  J Clin Ethics       Date:  2011

2.  Development of a documentation instrument for the conservative treatment of spinal disorders in the International Spine Registry, Spine Tango.

Authors:  J T Kessler; M Melloh; Thomas Zweig; E Aghayev; C Röder
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2010-06-09       Impact factor: 3.134

3.  Assessing Correlations of Physicians' Practice Intensity and Certainty During Residency Training.

Authors:  C Jessica Dine; Lisa M Bellini; Gretchen Diemer; Allison Ferris; Ashish Rana; Gina Simoncini; William Surkis; Charles Rothschild; David A Asch; Judy A Shea; Andrew J Epstein
Journal:  J Grad Med Educ       Date:  2015-12

4.  Testing Young Adults' Reactions to Facebook Cues and Their Associations with Alcohol Use.

Authors:  Megan A Moreno; Laina Mercer; Henry N Young; Elizabeth D Cox; Bradley Kerr
Journal:  Subst Use Misuse       Date:  2019-03-31       Impact factor: 2.164

5.  Clinical utility of a blood-based protein assay to increase screening of elevated-risk patients for colorectal cancer in the primary care setting.

Authors:  John Peabody; David Paculdo; Eric Swagel; Steven Fugaro; Mary Tran
Journal:  J Cancer Res Clin Oncol       Date:  2017-07-14       Impact factor: 4.553

6.  Accessibility, Availability, and Potential Benefits of Psycho-Oncology Services: The Perspective of Community-Based Physicians Providing Cancer Survivorship Care.

Authors:  Verena Zimmermann-Schlegel; Mechthild Hartmann; Halina Sklenarova; Wolfgang Herzog; Markus W Haun
Journal:  Oncologist       Date:  2017-04-24

7.  Democratic and Republican physicians provide different care on politicized health issues.

Authors:  Eitan D Hersh; Matthew N Goldenberg
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2016-10-03       Impact factor: 11.205

8.  Controversies in ulcerative colitis: a survey comparing decision making of experts versus community gastroenterologists.

Authors:  Brennan M R Spiegel; Wayne Ho; Eric Esrailian; Stephan Targan; Peter D R Higgins; Corey A Siegel; Marla Dubinsky; Gil Y Melmed
Journal:  Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol       Date:  2008-09-04       Impact factor: 11.382

9.  Assessment of physician practices in adult attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder.

Authors:  David W Goodman; Craig Bruce Surman; Priscilla B Scherer; Gregory D Salinas; Jennifer J Brown
Journal:  Prim Care Companion CNS Disord       Date:  2012-08-02

10.  Transfusion practices for acute traumatic brain injury: a survey of physicians at US trauma centers.

Authors:  Matthew J Sena; Ryan M Rivers; J Paul Muizelaar; Felix D Battistella; Garth H Utter
Journal:  Intensive Care Med       Date:  2008-10-15       Impact factor: 17.440

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.