All Entries Tagged With: "National Quality Forum"
When quality data reaches the public
Most of you who read this blog are likely aware of common adverse events that occur in hospitals, but what about the average Joe? “Never events” and “HACs” are terms the public is becoming more and more aware of. News stories are focusing on such events, mostly due to The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) March 31, 2011 release of Medicare data on certain measures, such as patient falls and central line infections. Before, only measures concerning heart attack and pneumonia patients were made public.
One thing you learn as a reporter is that all news is local—in other words, what’s happening in your own community usually takes precedent. It’s one thing to have the federal data on Hospital Compare, a site that is a bit cumbersome for average people to explore and find information that is meaningful to them, even if they know of the site in the first place; it’s another to read it in your local newspaper.
For example, if you live in Louiseville, KY, an article in yesterday’s paper explains which “never events” are occurring in your hospitals. The Post Crescent reports that hospitals in Fox Cities, Wisconsin suffer from a higher rate of pressure ulcers. Connecticut residents read last month that collectively, the state’s hospital had a higher level of objects left after surgery than the national average. In April, The Chicago Tribune reported on the newly available data and in Georgia, a state that does not publicly post such data, the Atlantic-Journal Constitution headline announces that Georgia residents have been kept in the dark on hospital infections. A simple Google news search shows many more city newspapers are reporting on the new data.
Of course, this is what transparency is all about. However, not all reports explain that the AHA is against the release of such raw data, and why. (The AHA is concerned the data are too raw and do not account for sickliness of patients. The organization has other concerns, including the fact that the measures have not been reviewed by an organization such as the National Quality Forum.)
What do you think? Is this ultimately good? Will this lead to more quality efforts in healthcare? Will it lead to more funding, more public awareness? Will more news coverage lead consumers to use Hospital Compare more regularly? Have you seen your hospital in the news? Has the media had an effect on your quality efforts?
A new proposed rule would allow more Medicare data to be available, as I posted last week. The new link to the proposed rule can be found here.
NQF endorses new measures
The National Quality Forum (NQF) has endorsed eight outcome measures for pulmonary and cardiovascular conditions and care provided by the ICU, according to an NQF press release. The eight measures include two composite measures that address 30-day post-hospital discharge for patients with acute myocardial infarction and heart failure. Additional measures include:
- Length of stay in the ICU
- ICU mortality rate
- Readmission rates for percutaneous coronary intervention
- Quality of life for COPD patients following pulmonary rehabilitation
- Functional capacity for COPD patients following pulmonary rehabilitation
- Complication rates following implantation of implantable cardioverter defibrillator
NQF considers change of ‘serious reportable event’ definition
The National Quality Forum (NQF) is mulling a change of the definition of “serious reportable event” (SRE) and although the change is only involves one word, that word could truly effect the intent of the term. Currently the definition is:
preventable, serious, and unambiguous adverse events that should never occur.
The proposed change would replace the word “never” to “not” so the new definition would read:
preventable, serious, and unambiguous adverse events that should not occur.
The NQF’s steering committee on the topic has developed a rationale for this proposed change, and has solicited public comment through today on the topic. The rationale contains many reasons (which you can find by clicking here and scrolling to the “Comment on the revised SRE definition” section of the page, and then clicking on “draft definitions”) but they mostly all boil down to the idea that proclaiming that an event should “never” occur, and categorizing it as such, may be unrealistic in the healthcare setting. Additionally, if an event is considered something that should never occur, there should be a viable solution available, which may not always the case either. The committee is hoping that by dropping the “never” from the definition, more harmful events could be included into what is reported by hospitals, leading to further quality improvement.
Anyway, if you want to share your opinion with the NQF steering committee, click here. Judging from the already submitted comments, there are many people out there who are against dropping the “never” from the definition of SRE because it will not convey the seriousness of the events included in the list.
What do you think?
National Quality Forum endorses set of measure for managing medications
The National Quality Forum (NQF) has endorsed a set of 18 measures to better manage over-the-counter and prescription medications and improve the safety of using such medications. The standards focus on helping patients improve their adherence to prescription regimens. Specifically, patients with certain conditions, such as diabetes, asthma, coronary artery disease, kidney disease, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and schizophrenia, are more likely to be involved in a preventable adverse drug event due to incorrectly taking medication.
Up to 40 percent of patients do not take their medications as prescribed, and an estimated 1.5 million preventable adverse drug events occur each year. The National Quality Forum hopes these new standards will reduce these numbers by identifying gaps and areas to improve.
To read more from the NQF, click here.
Do you think the NQF’s latest set of measures will help those in the industry understand why certain patients are more at risk for an adverse event when taking over the counter prescriptions?
Expert information on HCAHPS and patient satisfaction
I wanted to make special note of a book that has just published. HCAHPS Basics: A Resource Guide for Healthcare Managers really is just that–a great resource for anyone who has a part in their hospital’s HCAHPS scores management. The book contains tips and advice from author Carrie Brady, JD, MA, vice president of quality at Planetree, a network of healthcare providers working to advance patient centered care. I personally worked with Carrie, who spent several years as vice president for the Connecticut Hospital Association, helping to develop two statewide pilot tests of the HCAHPS Survey. She certainly knows her stuff, and will show you the way through everything HCAHPS, including choosing a vendor, choosing a survey mode, reporting results, getting leadership support, and steps to improve patient satisfaction. The book contains case studies, including the Cleveland Clinic, and includes a CD with even more useful tips and tools. Click here for more information on this inexpensive resource.
While on the topic, I also wanted to make special note of an upcoming audio conference, HCAHPS: Improve Your Scores and Increase Patient Satisfaction, on June 24th. Expert speakers Deirdre Mylod, PhD, and Kimberly Sparks from Press Ganey Associates will speak about national trends in HCAHPS, benchmarking, leadership support, and more. I’ve also been personally working with these speakers, and I can tell you it’s going to be a great program. For more information about it, click here.
NQF urges adoption of Safe Practices
The National Quality Forum this week rolled out its 2009 Safe Practices for Better Healthcare, a series of 34 evidence-based practices including catheter-associated urinary tract infection, multidrug-resistant organisms, and organ donation.
To get the word out, the NQF is launching a year-long webinar series will begin in April to provide Safe Practices implementation strategies and commentary from experts in the field. The practices are based on six years of work defining and refining strategies to improve patient safety. Several previously endorsed practices were updated based on new evidence, including practices in areas such as the pharmacist’s role in medication management and pressure ulcers, and an entire chapter on healthcare-associated infections.
You can download the report here.
NQF endorses patient-centered care guidelines
The National Quality Forum (NQF) this week endorsed 45 guidelines designed to help hospitals provide patient-centered and culturally appropriate care. The practices cover issues such as communication, community engagement, data collection and quality improvement, leadership, care delivery, and workforce training.
Individual guidelines suggest efforts such as partnering with community organizers to reach diverse populations, translating written materials into languages used by the local community, and implementing strategies to recruit and retain employees who reflect local community demographics.
The guidelines were introduced to help facilities reduce disparities in healthcare among racial and ethnic minorities, who face disproportionately higher rates of disease, disability, and mortality.
