Quality, Research, and Accountable Care, Oh My!
Stacey Ishman, MD, MPH BOG, Member-at-Large The Affordable Care Act (ACA) has become the four-letter word of the medical world, and yet the tenets of the ACA are based on improved patient access, supporting preventative care, and a greater emphasis on the provision and measurement of quality care. Tenets, I hope, we can all support and aspire to achieve. And while the current legislation may not satisfy many (or any) of us, I think we can all endeavor to improve the medical world around us. As the science of quality and performance improvement rapidly grows, we all need to focus on our practices, our patients, and the systems within our purview. Measurement, whether of our outcomes or the systems in which we work, is the key to more effective and cost-efficient patient care. These kinds of endeavors do not require large medical system programs, but the determination of individuals or groups to investigate the effectiveness of our current care systems. Understanding our surgical and medical outcomes remains the ultimate goal of these efforts in order to optimize patient care. While research may support the broad establishment of quality systems, the ability to gauge our care outcomes starts with an individual mandate to measure something: tonsil bleeds, fistula rates, hospital readmissions, or post-operative pneumonias. Many of us may have existing systems based on tracking with an Excel spreadsheet of cases or piles of operating room and clinic schedules (I have used both), but the advantage of the electronic medical record (EMR) is the ability to track and measure without all the manual effort. If we can trade all the pain, time, and money we are investing in EMRs for some substantial, useful data that can support or improve our practices, maybe there is a silver lining. Every system has failures, and medicine has been in the forefront of analyzing these while reviewing methods to improve individual care through the morbidity and mortality conference. While the airline industry is commonly touted for its failure analysis and safety culture, physicians have been evaluating our negative outcomes since before air travel even existed. This commitment has long served as a fantastic communal basis for quality improvement, and preserved a culture of accountability. In addition, it forms the basis for our current efforts to move to the next stage and implement system-wide changes based on these observations. While individual efforts prove critical here, the establishment of research protocols and programs remains fundamental to outcomes improvement. Toward this end, the ACA resulted in the creation of the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute (PCORI), which focuses on assessment of treatment, diagnosis, and prevention, system-wide improvements, and disparities. While these national programs are important and will hopefully provide funding that directly improves otolaryngologic care, the Academy itself has joined forces with subspecialty societies, foundations, and industry sponsors to broaden research opportunities through the Centralized Otolaryngology Research Efforts (CORE). Since 1985, CORE has awarded more than 500 grants and more than $9 million for research projects, research training, and career development to further the specialty of otolaryngology, with grants ranging from $5,000 to $80,000. The Academy’s committee system has also been dedicated to these efforts, and primary efforts have been highlighted through the Patient Safety and Quality Improvement and the Outcomes Research and Evidence-Based Medicine committees. In addition, the Academy has been at the national forefront of evidence-based guidelines creation and has helped establish internationally recognized methodology for their construction. As we embrace a focus on quality, outcomes, and the ACA, please join the Board of Governors at the Annual Meeting at 8:00 am on Tuesday, October 1 for a miniseminar titled, “Hot Topics in Otolaryngology: ACOs.” We will discuss accountable care organizations (ACOs), and the payment and care delivery model created through the ACA that ties reimbursement to performance and cost reduction. At the end of the day, we all enjoy caring for patients and celebrating medical successes with them. Who wouldn’t be proud when a child gets to leave the hospital after airway reconstruction or a patient can sleep through the night (and not in school or work) after amelioration of their severe sleep apnea? If embracing a system of constant evaluation and measurement is the way to make these outcomes happen more frequently, I am on board. I hope that you will join me in these efforts. 2013 BOG Slate of Candidates Chair-Elect Wendy B. Stern, MD (MA) Jay S. Youngerman, MD (NY) Secretary Joseph E. Hart, MD (IA) Sanjay R. Parikh, MD (WA)
BOG, Member-at-Large
The Affordable Care Act (ACA) has become the four-letter word of the medical world, and yet the tenets of the ACA are based on improved patient access, supporting preventative care, and a greater emphasis on the provision and measurement of quality care. Tenets, I hope, we can all support and aspire to achieve. And while the current legislation may not satisfy many (or any) of us, I think we can all endeavor to improve the medical world around us.
As the science of quality and performance improvement rapidly grows, we all need to focus on our practices, our patients, and the systems within our purview. Measurement, whether of our outcomes or the systems in which we work, is the key to more effective and cost-efficient patient care. These kinds of endeavors do not require large medical system programs, but the determination of individuals or groups to investigate the effectiveness of our current care systems. Understanding our surgical and medical outcomes remains the ultimate goal of these efforts in order to optimize patient care.
While research may support the broad establishment of quality systems, the ability to gauge our care outcomes starts with an individual mandate to measure something: tonsil bleeds, fistula rates, hospital readmissions, or post-operative pneumonias. Many of us may have existing systems based on tracking with an Excel spreadsheet of cases or piles of operating room and clinic schedules (I have used both), but the advantage of the electronic medical record (EMR) is the ability to track and measure without all the manual effort. If we can trade all the pain, time, and money we are investing in EMRs for some substantial, useful data that can support or improve our practices, maybe there is a silver lining.
Every system has failures, and medicine has been in the forefront of analyzing these while reviewing methods to improve individual care through the morbidity and mortality conference. While the airline industry is commonly touted for its failure analysis and safety culture, physicians have been evaluating our negative outcomes since before air travel even existed. This commitment has long served as a fantastic communal basis for quality improvement, and preserved a culture of accountability. In addition, it forms the basis for our current efforts to move to the next stage and implement system-wide changes based on these observations.
While individual efforts prove critical here, the establishment of research protocols and programs remains fundamental to outcomes improvement. Toward this end, the ACA resulted in the creation of the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute (PCORI), which focuses on assessment of treatment, diagnosis, and prevention, system-wide improvements, and disparities. While these national programs are important and will hopefully provide funding that directly improves otolaryngologic care, the Academy itself has joined forces with subspecialty societies, foundations, and industry sponsors to broaden research opportunities through the Centralized Otolaryngology Research Efforts (CORE). Since 1985, CORE has awarded more than 500 grants and more than $9 million for research projects, research training, and career development to further the specialty of otolaryngology, with grants ranging from $5,000 to $80,000.
The Academy’s committee system has also been dedicated to these efforts, and primary efforts have been highlighted through the Patient Safety and Quality Improvement and the Outcomes Research and Evidence-Based Medicine committees. In addition, the Academy has been at the national forefront of evidence-based guidelines creation and has helped establish internationally recognized methodology for their construction.
As we embrace a focus on quality, outcomes, and the ACA, please join the Board of Governors at the Annual Meeting at 8:00 am on Tuesday, October 1 for a miniseminar titled, “Hot Topics in Otolaryngology: ACOs.” We will discuss accountable care organizations (ACOs), and the payment and care delivery model created through the ACA that ties reimbursement to performance and cost reduction.
At the end of the day, we all enjoy caring for patients and celebrating medical successes with them. Who wouldn’t be proud when a child gets to leave the hospital after airway reconstruction or a patient can sleep through the night (and not in school or work) after amelioration of their severe sleep apnea? If embracing a system of constant evaluation and measurement is the way to make these outcomes happen more frequently, I am on board. I hope that you will join me in these efforts.
- Chair-Elect Wendy B. Stern, MD (MA) Jay S. Youngerman, MD (NY)
- Secretary Joseph E. Hart, MD (IA) Sanjay R. Parikh, MD (WA)