Nathan B Fountain1. 1. Department of Neurology, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, VA 22908, USA. nbf2p@virginia.edu
Abstract
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The science of quality of care in medicine has been emerging for the past decade, but it has only recently addressed epilepsy care. Quality of care in this sense refers to implementation of policies in large populations to improve care. This can have a large impact on epilepsy patients, as much of their care is delivered by generalists who can improve their care through the explicit direct requirements of quality measures. RECENT FINDINGS: Eight epilepsy quality performance measures were recently approved by national organizations, but only three were adopted by Medicare and only one by the National Quality Forum. The main reason for not adopting them is the lack of high-level evidence. However, there is high-level evidence for the efficacy of epilepsy surgery and use of newer antiepileptic drugs for the treatment of intractable epilepsy. Other problems are the lack of information about gaps in care and the imprecision in epilepsy diagnosis coding. SUMMARY: Quality measurement will continue in epilepsy care, so a working knowledge of the topic is required by healthcare providers. Implementation of standardized quality measures can improve the care of people with epilepsy if the measures have demonstrated efficacy and can address gaps in care, and implementation is feasible.
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The science of quality of care in medicine has been emerging for the past decade, but it has only recently addressed epilepsy care. Quality of care in this sense refers to implementation of policies in large populations to improve care. This can have a large impact on epilepsypatients, as much of their care is delivered by generalists who can improve their care through the explicit direct requirements of quality measures. RECENT FINDINGS: Eight epilepsy quality performance measures were recently approved by national organizations, but only three were adopted by Medicare and only one by the National Quality Forum. The main reason for not adopting them is the lack of high-level evidence. However, there is high-level evidence for the efficacy of epilepsy surgery and use of newer antiepileptic drugs for the treatment of intractable epilepsy. Other problems are the lack of information about gaps in care and the imprecision in epilepsy diagnosis coding. SUMMARY: Quality measurement will continue in epilepsy care, so a working knowledge of the topic is required by healthcare providers. Implementation of standardized quality measures can improve the care of people with epilepsy if the measures have demonstrated efficacy and can address gaps in care, and implementation is feasible.
Authors: J Miguel Cisneros-Franco; Marco A Díaz-Torres; Juan B Rodríguez-Castañeda; Alejandro Martínez-Silva; Mildred A Gutierrez-Herrera; Daniel San-Juan Journal: BMC Neurol Date: 2013-08-28 Impact factor: 2.474