|
|
About CHSRA
Research Projects
Quality Indicators
|
Quality Indicators: Original CHSRA QIs
Quality Indicators versus Quality Measures
Quality indicators are not direct measures of quality; they are pointers that indicate
potential problem areas that need further review and investigation. Quality
indicators are the starting point for a process of evaluating the quality
of care though careful investigation. A true measure of quality identifies
an aspect of care where there definitely is a problem and describes the
extent of the problem. Quality measures are their own end points; no further
investigation is needed in order to make judgments about the quality of
care. Consumers, policy-makers and many others who are interested in the
quality of care provided by a facility are not able to conduct clinical
investigations. They need information that clearly relates to actual problems.
They need true quality measures which, unlike quality indicators, become
the sole judge of quality.
The Center for Health Systems Research and Analysis (CHSRA) QIs are quality
indicators. Therefore a high percentile ranking on a particular QI (e.g.,
82nd percentile on the QI, Prevalence of Falls) on a quarterly QI report does
not necessarily mean that there is a problem with the quality of care in the
facility. It simply means that there is a flag that draws your attention to
a potential problem that may need to be investigated. By the same token, having
an average or low score on a particular QI (e.g., 21st percentile on the QI,
Prevalence of Indwelling Catheters) does not mean that there is not a quality
problem; there may be problems with quality of care that are not captured
by the QIs. Careful investigation can help decide if a high QI percentile
rank is really identifying a quality problem. Other sources of information
(e.g., progress notes) may be helpful with the issue of identifying quality
problems that are not covered by the QIs.
The CHSRA QIs can be used to identify concerns which will need further investigation;
but on their own, they should not be used to make final judgments about the
quality of care. The final decision of whether or not there is a quality problem
requires careful and skilled investigation by clinical experts. This is an
important consideration for how the information in the QI reports is used.
For example, State surveyors are able to access QI reports. They are currently
able to use the reports to focus their on-site survey to potential problem
areas, however they also need to carefully investigate the potential problem
areas in order to determine whether deficiencies should be issued. Likewise,
facilities should be careful to not to use the information in their QI reports
to draw specific comparisons to other facilities or portray the overall quality
of their facility as compared to other facilities. The QI information in the
QI reports is extremely useful in helping identify areas or systems in a facility
that may be improved, but the QI reports should not be used as the single
judge of the quality of care the facility delivers. A final determination
of quality requires detailed clinical review and investigation.
|
|