American Heart Journal
Volume 152, Issue 3 , Pages 410-413 , September 2006

Reporting for provider performance: Should we punish the bad, or try to make them all good?

  • T. Bruce Ferguson Jr, MD

      Affiliations

    • Corresponding Author InformationReprint requests: T. Bruce Ferguson Jr, MD, East Carolina Heart Institute, Division of CT & Vascular Surgery, 600 Moye Blvd., Greenville, NC 27858-4354.

Received 12 December 2005 ,Accepted 22 January 2006.

References 

  1. Institute of Medicine . To err is human. Building a safer health system. Accessed at http://www.iom.edu/object.file/master/4/117/0.pdf[Accessed 12/11/05]
  2. Ferguson TB, Peterson ED, Coombs LP, et al. Use of continuous quality improvement to increase use of process measures in patients undergoing coronary artery bypass graft surgery: a randomized controlled trial. JAMA. 2003;290:49–56
  3. Bradley EH, Holmboe ES, Mettera JA, et al. A qualitative study of increasing beta-blocker use after myocardial infarction: why do some hospitals succeed?. JAMA. 2001;285:2604–2611
  4. Kiefe CI, Allison JJ, Williams OD, et al. Improving quality improvement using achievable benchmarks for physician feedback: a randomized controlled trial. JAMA. 2001;285:2871–2879
  5. Roe MT, Peterson ED. Improvements in quality improvement. Am Heart J. 2005;149:751–752
  6. McGlynn EA, Asch SM, Adams J, et al. The quality of health care delivered to adults in the United States. N Engl J Med. 2003;348:2635–2645
  7. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. Department of Health and Human Services. Cited at http://www.ahrq.gov/consumer/guidetoq/guidetoq4.htm. Accessed 12/11/05.
  8. Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, Department of Health and Human Services. Cited at http://www.hospitalcompare.hhs.gov. Accessed 12/11/05.
  9. Pacific Business Group on Health. Advancing physician performance measurement: using administrative data to assess physician quality and efficiency. Available at http://www.pbgh.org/news/eletters/documents/PBGHP3Report_09-01-05final.pdf[Accessed 12/11/05]
  10. Dranove D, Kessler D, McClellan M, et al. Is more information better? The effects of “Report Cards” on Health Care Providers. J Polit Econ. 2003;111:555–588
  11. Marshall MN, Shekelle PG, Leatherman S, et al. The public release of performance data: what do we expect to gain? A review of the evidence. JAMA. 2000;283:1866–1874
  12. Bentley JM, Nash DM. How Pennsylvania hospitals have responded to publicly released reports on coronary artery bypass graft surgery. Joint Comm J Qual Improv. 1998;24:40–49
  13. Chassin MR. Achieving and sustaining improved quality: lesson learned from New York State and cardiac surgery. Health Aff (Millwood). 2002;21:40–51
  14. Guru V, Fremes SE, Naylor CD, et al. Public vs. Private institutional performance reporting: what is mandatory for quality improvement?. Am Heart J. 2006;152:573–578
  15. Hannan EL, Kilburn H, Racz M, et al. Improving the outcomes of coronary artery bypass surgery in New York State. JAMA. 1994;271:761–766
  16. Peterson ED, et al. The effects of New York's bypass surgery provider profiling on access to care and patient outcomes in the elderly. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1998;32:993–999
  17. O'Connor GT, Plume SK, Olmstead EM, et al. A regional intervention to improve the hospital mortality associated with coronary artery bypass graft surgery: the Northern New England Cardiovascular Disease Study Group. JAMA. 1996;275:841–846
  18. Ferguson TB, Hammill B, Peterson ED, et al. A decade of change: risk profiles and outcomes for isolated CABG procedures, 1990-99: a report from the STS National Database Committee and the Duke Clinical Research Institute. Ann Thorac Surg. 2002;73:480–490
  19. Grover FL, Shroyer AWL, Hammermeister KE, et al. A decade's experience with quality improvement in cardiac surgery using the Veterans Affairs and Society of Thoracic Surgeons National Databases. Ann Surg. 2001;234:464–474
  20. Holman WL, Allman RM, Sansom M, et al. Alabama CABG Study Group: Alabama coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) project: results of a statewide quality improvement initiative. JAMA. 2001;285:3003–3010
  21. Arom KV, Peterson RJ, Orszulak TA, et al. Establishing and using a local/regional Cardiac Surgery Database. Ann Thorac Surg. 1997;64:1245–1249
  22. Kawachi Y, Nakashima A, Toshima Y, et al. Risk stratification analysis of operative mortality in heart and thoracic aorta surgery: comparison between Parsonnet and EuroSCORE additive model. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2001;20:961–966
  23. Gogbashian A, Sedrakyan A, Treasure T. EuroSCORE: a systematic review of international performance. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2004;25:695–700
  24. Grol R. Improving the quality of medical care: building bridges among professional pride, payer profit, and patient satisfaction. JAMA. 2001;286:2578–2585
  25. Grunkemeier G, Zerr KJ, Jin R. Cardiac surgery report cards: making the grade. Ann Thorac Surg. 2001;72:1845–1848
  26. The National Quality Forum Cardiac Surgery Performance Measures Project. Cited at http://www.qualityforum.org/docs/cardiac_care/webcardiacPUBLIC02-07-05.pdf. Accessed 12/11/05.
  27. Rosenthal MB, Fernandopulie R, RyuSong H, et al. Paying for quality: providers' incentives for quality improvement. Health Aff. 2004;23:127–144

PII: S0002-8703(06)00120-7

doi: 10.1016/j.ahj.2006.01.017

American Heart Journal
Volume 152, Issue 3 , Pages 410-413 , September 2006

Article Tools

* Image Usage & Resolution