BACKGROUND: Measuring the quality of health care is a fundamental step toward improving health care and is increasingly used in pay-for-performance initiatives and maintenance of certification requirements. Measure development to date has focused on primary care and common conditions such as diabetes; thus, the number of measures that apply to neurologic care is limited. The American Academy of Neurology (AAN) identified the need for neurologists to develop measures of neurologic care and to establish a process to accomplish this. OBJECTIVE: To adapt and test the feasibility of a process for independent development by the AAN of measures for neurologic conditions for national measurement programs. METHODS: A process that has been used nationally for measure development was adapted for use by the AAN. Topics for measure development are chosen based upon national priorities, available evidence base from a systematic literature search, gaps in care, and the potential impact for quality improvement. A panel composed of subject matter and measure development methodology experts oversees the development of the measures. Recommendation statements and their corresponding level of evidence are reviewed and considered for development into draft candidate measures. The candidate measures are refined by the expert panel during a 30-day public comment period and by review by the American Medical Association for Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) II codes. All final AAN measures are approved by the AAN Board of Directors. RESULTS: Parkinson disease (PD) was chosen for measure development. A review of the medical literature identified 258 relevant recommendation statements. A 28-member panel approved 10 quality measures for PD that included full specifications and CPT II codes. CONCLUSION: The AAN has adapted a measure development process that is suitable for national measurement programs and has demonstrated its capability to independently develop quality measures.
BACKGROUND: Measuring the quality of health care is a fundamental step toward improving health care and is increasingly used in pay-for-performance initiatives and maintenance of certification requirements. Measure development to date has focused on primary care and common conditions such as diabetes; thus, the number of measures that apply to neurologic care is limited. The American Academy of Neurology (AAN) identified the need for neurologists to develop measures of neurologic care and to establish a process to accomplish this. OBJECTIVE: To adapt and test the feasibility of a process for independent development by the AAN of measures for neurologic conditions for national measurement programs. METHODS: A process that has been used nationally for measure development was adapted for use by the AAN. Topics for measure development are chosen based upon national priorities, available evidence base from a systematic literature search, gaps in care, and the potential impact for quality improvement. A panel composed of subject matter and measure development methodology experts oversees the development of the measures. Recommendation statements and their corresponding level of evidence are reviewed and considered for development into draft candidate measures. The candidate measures are refined by the expert panel during a 30-day public comment period and by review by the American Medical Association for Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) II codes. All final AAN measures are approved by the AAN Board of Directors. RESULTS:Parkinson disease (PD) was chosen for measure development. A review of the medical literature identified 258 relevant recommendation statements. A 28-member panel approved 10 quality measures for PD that included full specifications and CPT II codes. CONCLUSION: The AAN has adapted a measure development process that is suitable for national measurement programs and has demonstrated its capability to independently develop quality measures.
Authors: Eric M Cheng; Andrew Siderowf; Kari Swarztrauber; Mahmood Eisa; Martin Lee; Barbara G Vickrey Journal: Mov Disord Date: 2004-02 Impact factor: 10.338
Authors: Elizabeth A Chrischilles; Linda M Rubenstein; Margaret D Voelker; Robert B Wallace; Robert L Rodnitzky Journal: Parkinsonism Relat Disord Date: 2002-01 Impact factor: 4.891
Authors: Jeffrey S Harman; Sarah Hudson Scholle; Judy H Ng; L Gregory Pawlson; Russell E Mardon; Samuel C Chris Haffer; Sarah Shih; Arlene S Bierman Journal: Med Care Date: 2010-03 Impact factor: 2.983
Authors: Fuzhong Li; Peter Harmer; Kathleen Fitzgerald; Elizabeth Eckstrom; Ronald Stock; Johnny Galver; Gianni Maddalozzo; Sara S Batya Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2012-02-09 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Ryan P Duncan; James T Cavanaugh; Gammon M Earhart; Terry D Ellis; Matthew P Ford; K Bo Foreman; Abigail L Leddy; Serene S Paul; Colleen G Canning; Anne Thackeray; Leland E Dibble Journal: Parkinsonism Relat Disord Date: 2015-05-16 Impact factor: 4.891
Authors: Nathan B Fountain; Paul C Van Ness; Amy Bennett; John Absher; Anup D Patel; Kevin N Sheth; David S Gloss; Diego A Morita; Mona Stecker Journal: Neurology Date: 2015-04-07 Impact factor: 9.910