On October 27, 2004, Andy Webber made a presentation in a Web Conference entitled Using AHRQ Quality Indicators for Hospital-level Reporting and Payment.
This is the text version of his slide presentation. Select to access the PowerPoint® slides (114 KB).
National Business Coalition on Health
Andy Webber
President and CEO
This slide contains a pie chart depicting the costs of poor care versus the costs of appropriate health care. The cost of poor care is 30%. The cost of appropriate health care is 70%
Beneath this pie chart is the text: "Causes of poor care: Misuse, underuse, overuse, waste - Juan Institute and MBCH 2003
Accelerating the pace to the Ultimate Goal: Quality and Health Status Improvement
This slide depicts a flow chart of the Care System. The top box shows the Care System. Below it are four boxes connected by arrows that shows: Supportive payment and regulatory environment; Organizations that facilitate the work of patient-centered teams; High performing patient-centered teams; and Outcomes: Safe, Effective, Efficient, Personalized, Timely, Equitable. Below these four boxes is one, large box with the text: Redesign Imperatives: Six Challenges: Reengineered care processes, Effective use of information technologies, Knowledge and skills management, Development of effective teams, Coordination of care across patient-conditions, services, sites of care over time, and Making change possible.
This slide uses a table to show the performance measurement in action. The first Measure Use is Hospitals with a 47% quality improvement activities score, a 28% public reporting score, and an 11% financial incentives score.
The second Measure Use is Health Plans with a 47% quality improvement activities score, a 42% public reporting score, and an 8% financial incentives score.
The third Measure Use is Individual Practitioners with a 13% quality improvement activities score, a 0% public reporting score, and a 3% financial incentives score.
This slide shows an example of a report. The report has a legend at the top and a graph below.
The legend reads: "What the symbols mean."
A grey shaded circle with a plus sign means few mistakes, complications and deaths than expected.
A white circle means average number of mistakes, complications and deaths.
A black circle means more mistakes, complications, and deaths than expected.
The graph shows the types of mistakes for 4 different regional hospitals in the areas of surgery, non-surgery, hip/knee replacement, cardiac, and maternity.
Hospital A
Surgery shows a grey shaded circle with a plus sign
Non-surgery shows a grey shaded circle with a plus sign
Hip/knee shows a grey shaded circle with a plus sign
Cardiac shows a grey shaded circle with a plus sign
Maternity shows a white circle
Hospital B
Surgery shows a grey shaded circle with a plus sign
Non-surgery shows a grey shaded circle with a plus sign
Hip/knee shows a grey shaded circle with a plus sign
Cardiac shows a white circle
Maternity shows a white circle
Hospital C
Surgery shows a grey shaded circle with a plus sign
Non-surgery shows a grey shaded circle with a plus sign
Hip/knee shows a grey shaded circle with a plus sign
Cardiac shows a white circle
Maternity shows a black circle
Hospital D
Surgery shows a grey shaded circle with a plus sign
Non-surgery shows a black circle
Hip/knee shows a grey shaded circle with a plus sign
Cardiac shows a black circle
Maternity shows an asterisk
This slide depicts a flow chart of the experimental design used for the Impact Report on Hospitals.
The first section shows 115 Eligible Hospitals in Wisconsin. Of the 115 hospitals 24 were in the Alliance service area (Hospitals in Public Report). The remaining 91 hospitals were in the Non-Alliance service area. After a random assignment, 46 hospitals fell into the no report category and 45 fell into the private report category. There is a footnote regarding the private report hospitals at the bottom of the slide.
*Three hospitals were lost to closure and two hospitals were ineligible due to overlapping administrative structures.
This slide depicts a bar graph showing the percents of hospitals with significant improvements and significant decline. The y-axis shows the percent ranging from 0% to 40%. The x-axis shows Public Report, Private Report, No Report.
The Public Report section shows 35% significant improvement and a 5% significant decline.
The Private Report section shows 23% significant improvement and 14% significant decline.
The No Report section shows 13% significant improvement and 13% significant decline.
This slide depicts a bar graph showing the percentage of hospitals with poor scores at baseline who improved their scores in the post-report period. The y-axis shows the percent ranging from 0% to 100%. The x-axis shows the Public Report, Private Report and No Report.
The Public Report (n=8) is 88%
The Private Report (n=15) is 33%
The No Report (n=12) is 42%
This slide shows a chart of the features needed for quality measures and whether or not AHRQ's Quality Indicators include these measures. The first feature is Expert Validation. The second feature is Rely on available data. The third feature is Risk adjusted. The fourth feature is Widely used, with comparative data available. All of the features are included in the AHRQ QI's.
Current as of March 2005
Internet Citation:
Using AHRQ Quality Indicators for Hospital-level Reporting and Payment. Text version of a slide presentation at a Web conference. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, Rockville, MD. http://www.ahrq.gov/news/ulp/buyright/webbertxt.htm
Return to Web Conference
State & Local Policymakers
AHRQ Home Page