Future Directions for the National Healthcare Quality and Disparities Reports

Future Directions for the National Healthcare Quality and Disparities Reports

On September 27, 2010, Sheila Burke, made this presentation at the 2010 Annual Conference. Select to access the PowerPoint® presentation (4 MB). Free PowerPoint® Viewer (Plugin Software Help).

Slide 1

>

Future Directions for the National Healthcare Quality and Disparities Reports

AHRQ 2010 Annual Conference
September 27, 2010

Image: The cover of the Institute of Medicine (IOM) report, Future Directions for the National Healthcare Quality and Disparities Reports.

Slide 2

>

Overview

• The Committee's charge
• A vision for the National Healthcare Quality and Disparities Reports (NHQR and NHDR)
• Changes to products
• Summary of recommendations

Slide 3

>

Committee Charge

• Establish priority areas for quality improvement and disparities.
• Update previous IOM guidance for the NHQR and NHDR (e.g., measure selection, framework, presentation, and data issues).

Slide 4

>

Committee Vision for NHQR & NHDR

• Be more forward-looking and action-oriented.
• Focus on priority areas and on measures with greatest potential for impact on population health.
• Ensure that equity is conveyed as integral to quality improvement.
• Present data in ways that identifies for policy makers and others the results of and prospects for evidence-based policies and interventions.

Slide 5

>

NHQR and NHDR

• Maintain two annual reports:
  • Parallelism in measures.
  • Flexibility on number of topics each year.
• Use a shared Highlights section:
  • More broadly distributed as a standalone product.
  • Include potential impact of closing performance gaps, state scorecard, summary of disparities, action messages to different audiences.
• Add access measures to the NHQR and State Snapshots.

Slide 6

>

Enhancements to Derivative Products

• State Snapshots (e.g., clearer dashboard ratings, easier access to rankings by measure, more detail on substate variation and subpopulation data, sort by HEDIS measures).
• Online customization of reports by topic area.
• Factsheets and mini-reports with more in-depth analysis for use in expanded outreach.
• Greater access to primary data and tools for analysis.

Slide 7

>

#1: AHRQ Use of Priority Areas

• NHQR and NHDR should report progress on national priority areas identified by the IOM and as a result of the health reform quality improvement strategy.
• Align measure selection with priority areas.
• Priority areas would not change annually.

Slide 8

>

IOM List of Priority Areas

• Patient/family engagement*
• Population health*
• Safety*
• Care coordination*
• Palliative care*
• Overuse*
• Access
• Health systems infrastructure capabilities

*NPP priority area

Slide 9

>

# 2 Updated Framework

• Quality components are expanded to include access, care coordination, and health systems infrastructure.
  • AHRQ can continue to use the components of quality to organize measures in the NHQR/NHDR.
• The matrix of quality components and types of care provides a way for AHRQ to examine its overall measure portfolio, not just those in the reports, for balance.
• When selecting measures for the NHQR/NHDR, each should be assessed for its potential contribution to:
  • Value (improvement in population health)
  • Equity (improvement in differences among populations, geographic areas, and health systems/payers).

Slide 10

>

Visual Depiction of Framework

Slide 11

>

The Relationship Among Priority Areas, Quality Framework, and Measure Selection

Priority setting, use of the framework, and measure selection are sequential steps:

• Establish priority areas.
• Choose metrics that are relevant to priority areas.
• Within each component of quality, assess the value and equity contribution of closing the gap between current performance and desired levels for each measure.
• Select measures for reporting in the NHQR/NHDR that provide the highest relative impact on value and equity.

Slide 12

>

#3: Transparent and Quantitative Measure Selection Process

Appoint Technical Advisory Subcommittee for Measure Selection to NAC that should:

• Evaluate and rank measures by contribution to value (greater population health impact) and equity if performance gaps were closed./li>

The Subcommittee's deliberations should also yield a measure and data development strategy.

Slide 13

>

#4: Expanded Use of Subnational Data

• Use when national measure and data gaps exist.
• Criteria for reporting subnational data:
  • Measure of interest (e.g., priority area).
  • Reliable and well-validated.
  • Sample is representative of population on which it reports.
• Be aspirational in identifying measures and data sources.

Slide 14

>

#5: Expanded Use of Sociodemographic Data in NHQR and NHDR

• Informed by subcommittee report (August 2009): Race, Ethnicity, and Language Data: Standardization for Health Care Quality Improvement.
• Stratify measures by at least OMB race, Hispanic ethnicity, SES, and insurance status; assess relationship of SES to race/ethnicity disparities.
• Analyze by language need and granular ethnicity when data are available.
• Document shortcomings in data availability.

Slide 15

>

#6: Make Products More Action-Oriented and Aligned with User Needs

• Incorporate priority areas, benchmarks, promising practices.
• Integrate NHQR and NHDR findings.
• Build capacity for customized reports by topic (easy access to data about specific topics, fact sheets and/or mini-reports).
• Enhance access to primary data for researchers.
• Tell a quality improvement story.

Slide 16

>

Telling a Quality Improvement Story

• Messages about performance gap: years to closure, relative benefit of closure, potential contributions of a measure to value and equity.
• Ways to affect change: data to inform policy, links to promising practices.
• Catalysts for achievement: benchmarks for best-in-class performance, data presented by accountable units.
• Identification of measure and data needs.

Slide 17

>

#7: Include Realistic Benchmarks

• Base on best known level of attained performance.
• Use same benchmark across NHQR and NHDR.
• Presenting benchmarks set by best State performance may best satisfy the information needs of Congressional and State policymakers.

Slide 18

>

#8: Consult with Communication and Presentation Experts

• Use graphics with embedded messages.
• Use text to offer more in-depth analyses.
• Include online more detail on statistical aspects of measurement for researchers.

Slide 19

>

#9: Additional Funds for AHRQ

• AHRQ should reallocate existing funds and leverage resources by partnering with other stakeholders (within and outside HHS).
• Additional funds are needed to:
  • Support the work of the Technical Advisory Subcommittee for Measure Selection.
  • Enhance report-related products and engagement activities.
  • Develop new measures and supporting data sources.

Slide 20

>

#10: Regular Evaluation of National Report Products

• Do products meet audience needs?
• To what degree is information in the NHQR, NHDR, and State Snapshots leveraged to spur action?

Slide 21

>

Questions?

Future Directions for the National Healthcare Quality and Disparities Reports
http://www.iom.edu/ahrqhealthcarereports

Race, Ethnicity, and Language Data: Standardization for Health Care Quality Improvement
http://iom.edu/Reports/2009/RaceEthnicityData.aspx