Grantee Organization and Principal
Investigator (PI) |
Evaluation Approach |
Measures |
1. Altarum
Institute PI: George J. Miller |
Evaluation of the tool by partners via assessment of
the face validity and utility of the model's structure, clinical protocols,
and outputs. Project was evaluating alternatives for responding to bioterrorist
events by simulating these alternatives in the model. |
|
2. American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) PI: Carole
M. Lannon, Center for Health Care
Quality, Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center |
Quantitative measures
of ADHD disease management processes, comparing treatment group
(eQIPP-enrolled and participating in AAP training/support) with controls
(enrolled only in eQIPP) at baseline and follow-up points
Comparison of QI
activities in treatment and control practices
Qualitative study of factors contributing to
AAP chapters' ability to develop and sustain QI |
% of charts
demonstrating target level of care for 7 ADHD dx and rx components
Frequency and
participation in QI activities for the two types of practices |
3. American College of Physicians (ACP) PI: Vincenza Snow |
Pseudo-randomized
trial comparing pre-and post measures or indicators from experimental
practices (those receiving practice-based, team-oriented CME training) to
control practices (same training but at a later time)
Qualitative evaluation
to elicit experiences of the practice teams and determine most useful aspects
of the program. |
Patient outcome and
practice patterns: process of care and clinical indicators from 15 enrolled
diabetes patients in each practice at baseline, during intervention and
post-intervention
Patient satisfaction,
pre-post levels
Practice team experiences: pre-post levels of
team collaboration |
4. American
Hospital Association (AHA), Health Research and Education Trust PI:
John R Combes |
Compare baseline data
from 3 initial learning labs to post-program data from 6 learning labs on
length-of-stay, patient and family satsifaction, and financial measures
# of new hospital-based
palliative care units created or enhancements to existing units as a result
of visits to learning labs
Hospitals participating in visits to learning
labs surveyed before and after their visits on the range of palliative care
services offered, and on whether learning objectives for the visit were met. |
Baseline clinical and
financial information
Patient/family
satisfaction measures with palliative care were not collected
6-month post visit
reports of value of training, lessons learned, and new or enhanced services
developed |
5. American
Medical Association (AMA) PI: Karen S. Kmetik |
Process evaluation to assess project
progress, and impact, of the two models for electronic data transfer of
physician care practicese; success of the rollout and sustainability on a
large scale over time; and generalizability of the models to other chronic
conditions. |
Changes in
AMA-developed process of care performance measures for diabetes, CAD and
major depressive disorder in participating physician practices |
6. American Medical
Directors Association (AMDA) PI: David F. Polakoff |
Compare process of
care and clinical measures at baseline with those at 9 and 15 months
post-intervention; randomized each participating NF to one of the two
clincial practice guidelines to serve as cross-controls ("nested")
Clinical practice guideline implementation
experiences of participants |
Process of care and
clinical outcomes for pain management and pressure ulcers in nursing
facilities that participated
# of staff and amount
of staff time spent on implementation, participation in each component of
implementation process |
7. Association of
California Nurse Leaders PI: Nancy Donaldson, CalNOC & UCSF School of Nursing |
Compare baseline and
post-intervention patient outcome measures in participating med-surg units
in the 35 intervention hospitals to non-participating units in the same
hospitals.
Qualitative assessment of implementation
progress. |
Falls per 1000 patient
days
Falls with injury/1000
patient days
Coaching processes
milestones, linker and learner feedback. |
8.
Catholic Healthcare Partners (CHP) PI: Donald E. Casey |
Quasi-experimental
design: tracked pre- and post-intervention process of care measures for
patients with heart failure, and compare these measures in participating and
non-participating hospitals in 6 CHP regions.
Track intervention implementation progress in
participating hospitals and assess effectiveness
of HF GAP Clinical Advocates in influencing the measures.
Assess effectiveness of the
CHP HF GAP Partnerships (system-wide and regional)—i.e., synergy, level of
involvement, etc. using tool created by PFQ subcommittee on evaluation |
4 HF inpatient performance measures: ACE inhibitor
prescribed at discharge, LVEF assessment, smoking cessation counseling and
appropriate discharge instructions
30 day "all cause" readmission rates for patients
with an index admission for DRG 127
Appropriate
use and dosage of beta-blockers & ACE inhibitors prescribed in outpatient
settings
Appropriate
identification & referral of chronic HF patients to palliative or hospice
care at or near the end of life
Participation
rates by cardiologists and primary care MDs in office-based QI activities
Successful negotiation of P4P incentives on above |
9. Child Health Corporation
of America (CHCA) PI: Paul J. Sharek, Stanford University School of Medicine & L Packard Children's Hospital |
Monitor process of care measures for targeted
pediatric conditions in participating hospitals, and compare measures of
compliance against AHRQ Hospital Patient Safety Best Practices |
|
10.
Connecticut Department of Public Health PI:
Louise Dembry, Yale-New Haven Health System & Yale School of Medicine |
Quasi-experimental design comparing short and
long-term knowledge of bioterrorism preparedness among physicians taking the
course (N=41) and a control group (those eligible to take the course at a
later time) (N=51) |
Measures of knowledge
of course content before the course, immediately after (only for those taking
the course), and 6-months after the course was administered. |
11.
HealthFront PI: Michael Callahan |
Assess the degree of "horizontal alignment" among purchasers, plans and
government agencies within a region in their use of payment incentives, e.g.
P4P, tiered networks to accelerate adoption of best practices |
Proportion of total insured population that is subject to "aligned incentives" in
the plans that use them. |
12. International
Severity Info Systems, Inc. PI: Susan Horn |
Assessment of baseline
and follow-up data on clinical, utilization and operational measures in
participating nursing facilities, as well as staff-related measures
Qualitative assessment via focus groups and
interviews of how the intervention supports use of best practice protocols in
study units, integrates into daily workflow, achieves process efficiencies
& gains user acceptance. |
Pressure ulcer
incidence acquired in and out of the facility; hospital admissions, ER
visits, # of forms used before and after intervention, annual turnover rates,
staff satisfaction. |
13. Joint
Commission for Accreditation of Healthcare Organizations (JCAHO) PI: Jerod M. Loeb |
Project's outcomes were not the subject of
its evaluation; it planned to evaluate the success of the project by
comparing the goals and objectives accomplished against those outlined in the
proposal. |
|
14. The
Leapfrog Group PI: Suzanne Delbanco |
Measure the impact of payer use of incentives
to promote the use of higher quality hospitals on employees' choice of
hospitals and hospital adoption of recommended patient safety practices; one
of the 6 sites measured employees use of hospitals pre and post incentive
program, comparing employees subject to the incentives with those not
affected |
- Employee admissions
to hospitals that do or do not meet Leapfrog patient safety standards.
- Hospitals applying
for and meeting standards in the pilot communities |
15. Lehigh Valley Hospital and Health Network PI: Mark Young, later Kenneth
D. Coburn |
Monitor diabetes
process-of-care measures and selected patients' clinical lab scores in
participating physician practices at baseline, 6 months and 12 months post
intervention.
Six-month reports to each practice included
their own process performance data and the latest ABC benchmarks for all
practices. |
Process: % of MDs
screening for HbA1c, lipids and micro-albuminariuria
Clinical: blood
pressure, lipid levels, cholesterol, triglycerides, hemoglobin |
16. New York State Dept Of Health PI:
Suzanne Broderick/Beth Dichter |
Quasi-experimental
design with 2 intervention groups and 1 control group, comparing pre-post
measures for all 3 groups. One intervention group had only provider staff
trained; the other had both provider staff and surveyors trained. |
-Implementation: % of
residents receiving the interventions; other measures of the degree to which
facilities and staff implemented the interventions
-Clinical measures: falls, hospitalizations, weight
loss and incontinence |
17.
Physicians Micro Systems, Inc. PI: Steven M Ornstein, Medical University of South Carolina |
Monitor changes in physician adherence to
clinical practice guidelines for 73 clinical indicators grouped into 8 areas
among the 100 practices participating in the project, and track change in
physician practices participating. Will also conduct in-depth case studies
of 10 practices |
Summary Quality Index: % of processes and
outcomes that are up-to-date or under control for a given patient or
practice; and a Diabetes Care Summary Quality Index |
18.
Research Triangle Institute PI: Lucy A
Savitz |
Assess partnership strength and synergy
created by the partnership in diffusing evidence-based practice |
|
19. Texas A&M University Health Sciences Center, Rural
and Community Health Institute (RCHI) PI: Josie R
Williams |
Project outcomes were not evaluated, other
than its progress in improving hospital and public health systems' ability to
respond to bioterrorism events and disasters. |
|
20.
Visiting Nurse Service of New York, Center for Home Care Policy and Research PI: Peny H
Feldman |
Process evaluation to assess the progress and success
of initial collaborative and its feasibility as a vehicle for quality
improvement.
CEO & staff surveys of implementation
experiences, perceptions of value, etc.
Monthly chart review tracking of clinical measures
for diabetes care and control and hospitalization rates for participants in
the ReACH project. |
CEO
& team perceptions of value
Org.
implementation measures
Indicators
of spread beyond pilot group and sustainability
Clinical measures for glycemic
control, foot care & medication management
Average agency-wide hospitalization rates |