Blake K Montgomery1, Jessica M Welch2, Lauren M Shapiro3, Kevin G Shea1, Robin N Kamal2. 1. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Lucile Packard Children's Hospital. 2. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Stanford University, Stanford. 3. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, CA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Quality measures provide a way to assess health care delivery and to identify areas for improvement that can inform patient care delivery. When operationalized by a hospital or a payer, quality measures can also be tied to physician or hospital reimbursement. Prior work on quality measures in orthopaedic surgery have identified substantial gaps in measurement portfolios and have highlighted areas for future measure development. This study aims to identify the portfolio of quality measures in pediatric orthopaedic surgery. METHODS: We used methodology of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) and reviewed PubMed/ MEDLINE and EMBASE, the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgery (AAOS), National Quality Forum (NQF), and the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ), for quality measures and candidate quality measures. Quality measure and candidate quality measures were categorized as structure, process, or outcome. Measures were also classified into 1 of the 6 National Quality Strategy priorities (safety, effective, patient centered, timely, efficient, and equitable). RESULTS: A review of PubMed/EMBASE returned 1640 potential quality measures and articles. A review of AAOS, NQF, and AHRQ databases found 80 potential quality measures. After screening we found a total of 18 quality measures and candidate quality measures specifically for pediatric orthopaedic surgery. Quality measures addressed conditions such as supracondylar humerus fractures, developmental dysplasia of the hip, and osteochondritis dissecans. There were 10 process measures, 8 outcome measure, and 0 structure measures. When we categorized by National Quality Strategy priorities and found 50% (9/18) were effective clinical care, 44% (8/18) were person and care-giver centered experience and outcomes, 6% (1/18) were efficient use of resources. CONCLUSIONS: There are few quality measures and candidate quality measures to assess pediatric orthopaedic surgery. Of the quality measure available, process measures are relatively over-represented. Pediatric orthopaedic surgeons can lead the development of outcome (eg, patient-reported outcomes after surgery) and structure measures (eg, subspecialty training certification) to assess quality of care in pediatric orthopaedic surgery. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level II-systematic review.
BACKGROUND: Quality measures provide a way to assess health care delivery and to identify areas for improvement that can inform patient care delivery. When operationalized by a hospital or a payer, quality measures can also be tied to physician or hospital reimbursement. Prior work on quality measures in orthopaedic surgery have identified substantial gaps in measurement portfolios and have highlighted areas for future measure development. This study aims to identify the portfolio of quality measures in pediatric orthopaedic surgery. METHODS: We used methodology of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) and reviewed PubMed/ MEDLINE and EMBASE, the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgery (AAOS), National Quality Forum (NQF), and the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ), for quality measures and candidate quality measures. Quality measure and candidate quality measures were categorized as structure, process, or outcome. Measures were also classified into 1 of the 6 National Quality Strategy priorities (safety, effective, patient centered, timely, efficient, and equitable). RESULTS: A review of PubMed/EMBASE returned 1640 potential quality measures and articles. A review of AAOS, NQF, and AHRQ databases found 80 potential quality measures. After screening we found a total of 18 quality measures and candidate quality measures specifically for pediatric orthopaedic surgery. Quality measures addressed conditions such as supracondylar humerus fractures, developmental dysplasia of the hip, and osteochondritis dissecans. There were 10 process measures, 8 outcome measure, and 0 structure measures. When we categorized by National Quality Strategy priorities and found 50% (9/18) were effective clinical care, 44% (8/18) were person and care-giver centered experience and outcomes, 6% (1/18) were efficient use of resources. CONCLUSIONS: There are few quality measures and candidate quality measures to assess pediatric orthopaedic surgery. Of the quality measure available, process measures are relatively over-represented. Pediatric orthopaedic surgeons can lead the development of outcome (eg, patient-reported outcomes after surgery) and structure measures (eg, subspecialty training certification) to assess quality of care in pediatric orthopaedic surgery. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level II-systematic review.
Authors: Geoffrey D Abrams; Daniel R Greenberg; Jason L Dragoo; Marc R Safran; Robin N Kamal Journal: Arthroscopy Date: 2017-06-24 Impact factor: 4.772
Authors: Olufemi E Adams; Sebastian A Cruz; Tessa Balach; Douglas R Dirschl; Lewis L Shi; Michael J Lee Journal: Jt Comm J Qual Patient Saf Date: 2019-12-30
Authors: Robin N Kamal; David Ring; Edward Akelman; Jeffrey Yao; David S Ruch; Marc Richard; Amy Ladd; Christopher Got; Philip Blazar; Sanjeev Kakar Journal: J Bone Joint Surg Am Date: 2016-03-16 Impact factor: 5.284