Literature DB >> 8118525

Toward the development of uniform reporting standards for managed care organizations: the Health Plan Employer Data and Information Set (Version 2.0).

J M Corrigan1, D M Nielsen.   

Abstract

The cornerstone of HEDIS 2.0 is measurement. Only by measuring how a plan performs with respect to defined measures will an employer be able to assess a plan's value and also hold a plan accountable for its performance. Because of time and resource constraints, there are many issues related to the development and use of the performance measures contained within HEDIS 2.0 that have been incompletely addressed or not addressed at all. Following are some of the issues that warrant further consideration. Selection of performance measures. The present set of performance measures represents only a first attempt to define measures that document health plan performance in a number of areas of health care delivery. The resulting measures constitute a core data and information set and should not be considered to be an optimum set. Many other areas and measures of health plan performance were considered, including costs of specific episodes of care, age-specific utilization of defined services, patients receiving appropriate follow-up care for identified preventive health services, stage of cancer at time of diagnosis in relationship to preventive services screening, and functional outcome assessment. These measures were not included in this revision of HEDIS because of difficulties in developing specifications for the measure and/or in obtaining reliable data. It will be important to address these areas in the future. Risk adjustment of performance measures. To minimize the effects of population differences, most of the recommended performance measures assess discrete aspects of the process of care delivery (for example, percentage of pregnant women with first-trimester visit) rather than outcomes. However, interpretation of certain measures (for example, low birthweight, hospital readmission rate) will be affected by the specific member characteristics of the health plan population. Health plans and employers need to be aware of this limitation when interpreting and comparing certain performance measures, and further refinements will be needed in future ierations.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 400 WORDS)

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1993        PMID: 8118525     DOI: 10.1016/s1070-3241(16)30037-2

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Jt Comm J Qual Improv        ISSN: 1070-3241


  11 in total

1.  Defining appropriateness: the challenge of knowing the difference.

Authors:  V A Kazandjian
Journal:  Qual Health Care       Date:  1998-12

2.  Whom should we profile? Examining diabetes care practice variation among primary care providers, provider groups, and health care facilities.

Authors:  Sarah L Krein; Timothy P Hofer; Eve A Kerr; Rodney A Hayward
Journal:  Health Serv Res       Date:  2002-10       Impact factor: 3.402

3.  Nurses' evaluation of pharmacists' services--a hospital survey.

Authors:  Ahuva Lustig; Rachel Sokol; Ronit Peled; Tamar David
Journal:  Pharm World Sci       Date:  2005-08

4.  A mental health program report card: a multidimensional approach to performance monitoring in public sector programs.

Authors:  R Rosenheck; D Cicchetti
Journal:  Community Ment Health J       Date:  1998-02

5.  Technique for efficient information retrieval in outpatient systems.

Authors:  J Marshall; E A Balas; J C Reid
Journal:  Proc AMIA Annu Fall Symp       Date:  1997

Review 6.  Informatics: essential infrastructure for quality assessment and improvement in nursing.

Authors:  S B Henry
Journal:  J Am Med Inform Assoc       Date:  1995 May-Jun       Impact factor: 4.497

7.  A Framework for the Development of maternal quality of care indicators.

Authors:  Lisa M Korst; Kimberly D Gregory; Michael C Lu; Carolina Reyes; Calvin J Hobel; Gilberto F Chavez
Journal:  Matern Child Health J       Date:  2005-09

8.  Does Provider Gender Affect the Quality of Primary Care?

Authors:  Jeffrey L Jackson; Amy Farkas; Cecilia Scholcoff
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2020-04-06       Impact factor: 5.128

9.  Post-inpatient attrition from care "as usual" in veterans with multiple psychiatric admissions.

Authors:  Nicholas W Bowersox; Stephen M Saunders; Bertrand Berger
Journal:  Community Ment Health J       Date:  2012-10-21

10.  Recruiting medical groups for research: relationships, reputation, requirements, rewards, reciprocity, resolution, and respect.

Authors:  Leif I Solberg
Journal:  Implement Sci       Date:  2006-10-26       Impact factor: 7.327

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.