Advertisement

Quality Measures for Patient, Family, and Caregiver Engagement

  • Jean Moody-Williams
Chapter

Abstract

Patient and family engagement has become particularly important with the development of new models of delivering health care. Many new incentive programs rely on clinical quality measure to gauge patient engagement and outcome. Advances in various forms of health information technology allow for the collection of data that can be analyzed and provided to clinicians and healthcare systems for measurement of care coordination; federal, state, and local governments and private payers for oversight and payment; and most importantly patients, families, and caregivers for healthcare decision-making. Several mechanisms are used to collect information for quality measures such as medical record abstraction, claims, electronic health records, clinical data registries, smartphones, personal fitness devices, and other emerging means of collecting information. Regardless of how collected, clinicians are critical to generating the required data for promoting transparency for patients and families in value-based care.

Keywords

Clinical quality measures Meaningful measurement framework Claims data Clinical data registries Quality measures Electronic clinical quality measures Quality measurement 

References

  1. About CAHPS. Rockville, MD: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality; April 2018. http://www.ahrq.gov/cahps/about-cahps/index.html.
  2. American Nurses Association. Nurse quality research studies. 2017. https://www.nursingworld.org/practice-policy/innovation/quality/. Retrieved 24 Feb 2019.
  3. Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services. CMS meaningful measurement framework. Meaningful measures hub. Baltimore: CMS. Oct 12, 2017. Retrieved 20 Jan 2019. Page last modified: 21 Sept 2018.Google Scholar
  4. Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services. CMS EHR meaningful use overview. EHR Incentive Programs. Center for Medicare & Medicaid Services. Oct 12, 2019. Archived from the original on 30 October 2011. Retrieved 31 Oct 2011.Google Scholar
  5. Donabedian A. Evaluating the quality of medical care. (A Series of publicly funded papers Commissioned by the Health Services Research Study Section of the United States Public Health Service. Discussed at a Conference Held in Chicago, October 15–16, 1965 (Jul 1966), pp. 166–206. Milbank Mem Fund Quart. 1966;44(3):166–206.  https://doi.org/10.2307/3348969
  6. Donabedian A. Evaluating the quality of medical care. 1966. Milbank Quart. 2005;83(4):691–729.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. eCQM Resource Center. About eCQM. n.d.. https://ecqi.healthit.gov/ecqms. Retrieved 23 Feb 2019.
  8. Health Care Payment Learning & Action Network. Measuring progress: adoption of alternative payment models in commercial, Medicaid, Medicare advantage, and Medicare fee-for-service programs. October 22, 2018.Google Scholar
  9. Health Care Payment Learning and Action Network. Principles for patient-and family-centered payment. n.d.. http://hcp-lan.org/workproducts/cpag-principles.pdf. Retrieved 17 June 2019.
  10. Montalvo I. The National Database of Nursing Quality Indicators TM (NDNQI®). Online J Issues Nurs. 2007;12(3):Manuscript 2.Google Scholar
  11. National Committee for Quality Assurance. HEDIS and performance measurement. n.d.. https://www.ncqa.org/hedis/. Retrieved 24 Feb 2019.
  12. National Quality Forum. (1/10/13). Patient Reported Outcomes (PROs) in performance measurement. Contract HHSM-500-2009-00010C Task order 14.2. n.d.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jean Moody-Williams
    • 1
  1. 1.Transitions, Trust and TriumphBaltimoreUSA

Personalised recommendations