Literature DB >> 9755731

Assessing quality of care via HEDIS 3.0. Is there a better way?

A G Mainous1, J Talbert.   

Abstract

Patients, employers, and third-party payers are all calling for improved measures of health care quality. This has led to the development of "report cards," assessments that are many times applied not just to health plans but also to providers. One attempt at creating a standardized set of quality and effectiveness measures is the Health Plan Employer Data and Information Set (HEDIS). The HEDIS measures are based primarily on analyses of administrative data sets. Problems with HEDIS measures, including the probability that plans will use different data collection methods and a lack of risk adjustment, may result in incorrect conclusions about the quality of care delivered by various providers. An alternative method of standardized surveys is proposed that will overcome many of the limitations of the current HEDIS measures, provide outcome rather than process data, and provide data for developing interventions to improve quality.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1998        PMID: 9755731     DOI: 10.1001/archfami.7.5.410

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Arch Fam Med        ISSN: 1063-3987


  5 in total

1.  Pediatric pay-for-performance in asthma: who pays?

Authors:  Rodney Johnson; Chitra Dinakar
Journal:  Curr Allergy Asthma Rep       Date:  2010-11       Impact factor: 4.806

2.  The role of data in health care disparities in Medicaid managed care.

Authors:  David Moskowitz; Bruce Guthrie; Andrew B Bindman
Journal:  Medicare Medicaid Res Rev       Date:  2012-11-05

3.  Comparison of Electronic Health Record-Based and Claims-Based Diabetes Care Quality Measures: Causes of Discrepancies.

Authors:  Michael Barton Laws; Joanne Michaud; Renee Shield; William McQuade; Ira B Wilson
Journal:  Health Serv Res       Date:  2017-12-28       Impact factor: 3.402

4.  Effect of part-time practice on patient outcomes.

Authors:  Patricia H Parkerton; Edward H Wagner; Dean G Smith; Hugh L Straley
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2003-09       Impact factor: 5.128

5.  Using Clinical Data Standards to Measure Quality: A New Approach.

Authors:  John D D'Amore; Chun Li; Laura McCrary; Jonathan M Niloff; Dean F Sittig; Allison B McCoy; Adam Wright
Journal:  Appl Clin Inform       Date:  2018-06-13       Impact factor: 2.342

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.