Search

CONTEXT Pay-for-performance programs may be widely implemented, but gaps remain in our understanding of the implementation of performance measurement approaches. OBJECTIVES To compare 3 approaches to hypertension quality measurement as applied to high-quality care delivered by a hypertension expert. METHODS Care of 23 patients treated by a single hypertension expert was assessed by 3 measurement approaches: (1) outcome, (2) a multicomponent process, and (3) "outcome-linked" process. Exemplary case studies were identified to illustrate additional challenges to applying the approaches. RESULTS Forty-four percent of patients (n = 10) had complete concordance between the outcome and outcome-linked process approaches, 22% of patients (n = 5) had complete concordance between the outcome and multicomponent process approaches, 52% of patients (n = 12) had complete concordance between outcome-linked process and multicomponent process approaches, and 22% of patients (n = 5) had uniform agreement among all 3 approaches. Case studies revealed numerous opportunities for misinterpretation or gaming by providers. CONCLUSIONS Currently available measurement approaches resulted in a varied assessment of provider performance under optimal hypertension care conditions suggesting that caution is required before their use for provider compensation.

BACKGROUND While the importance of teaching quality improvement (QI) is recognized, formal opportunities to teach it are limited and are not always successful at getting physician trainee buy-in. We summarize findings that emerged from a QI curriculum designed to promote physician trainee insights into the evaluation and improvement of quality of care. METHODS Grounded-theory approaches to thematic coding of responses from 24 trainees to open-ended items about aspects of a QI curriculum. The 24 trainees were subsequently divided into 9 teams that provided group responses to open-ended items about assessing quality care. Coding was also informed by notes from group discussions. RESULTS Successes associated with QI projects reflected several aspects of optimizing care such as approaches to improving processes and enabling providers. Counterproductive themes included aspects of compromising care such as creating blinders and complicating care delivery. Themes about assessing care included absolute versus process trade-offs, time frame, documentation completeness, and the underrecognized role of the patient/provider dynamic. CONCLUSIONS Our mapping of the themes provides a useful summary of issues and ways to approach the potential lack of buy-in from physician trainees about the value of QI and the "mixed-messages" regarding inconsistencies in the application of presumed objective performance measures.