1. Keeping psychologists in the driver’s seat: Four perspectives on quality improvement and clinical data registries
- Author
-
Diane Pedulla, John McLeod, Caroline Vaile Wright, James F. Boswell, Michael J. Constantino, Tony Rousmaniere, Katherine C. Nordal, and Louis G. Castonguay
- Subjects
050103 clinical psychology ,Quality management ,Scrutiny ,education ,PsycINFO ,Medicare ,03 medical and health sciences ,0302 clinical medicine ,Health care ,Humans ,Psychology ,0501 psychology and cognitive sciences ,Registries ,Reimbursement ,Clinical governance ,Medical education ,business.industry ,05 social sciences ,Quality Improvement ,Mental health ,United States ,030227 psychiatry ,Psychiatry and Mental health ,Clinical Psychology ,business ,Qualitative research - Abstract
Performance accountability-also frequently referred to as quality improvement in the fields of medicine and public policy-is under growing scrutiny in mental and behavioral health care. As one high-profile example, psychologists and other mental health providers will be deemed "eligible clinicians" under the 2015 Medicare Access and Children's Health Insurance Program Reauthorization Act starting in 2019. This will incentivize psychologists to track their Medicare patients' clinical outcomes and report them in data registries, and those who do not will suffer a reimbursement penalty. However, many psychologists are not aware of these developments or prepared for this change. The goal of this article is to provide information to psychologists about quality improvement and clinical data registries from four distinct, though overlapping, vantage points: professional governance, quantitative research, qualitative research, and clinical practice. We review recent regulations and research in this area, with an emphasis on exploring both the potential benefits and challenges of quality improvement. We conclude by providing recommendations for the field of psychology. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved).
- Published
- 2020