330 likes | 578 Views
SCIP Special Study
E N D
1. Progress on the Surgical Care Improvement Project(SCIP) Special Study:The Unique Role of aSurgeon Organization and
2. SCIP Special Study…From Surgical Infection Prevention (SIP) to SCIP Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) contract awarded to:
Kentucky Medicare Quality Improvement Organization (QIO)
Ohio Medicare QIO
3. SCIP Special Study continued Subcontracts:
Kentucky Medicare QIO with Quality Surgical Solutions
Ohio Medicare QIO with Oklahoma Medicare QIO
4. Quality Surgical Solutions (QSS) A surgeon organization whose mission
is to improve quality and decrease costs of surgical care
5. QSS–Added Value to SCIP Surgical quality expertise
Surgical research and practice expertise
Practiced, accomplished leadership
Surgeon network
Hospital recruitment and commitment
Access to surgeon data on hospital case abstracted data
6. Building Physician Consensus Growing awareness of quality movement
Quality is more than the avoidance of error
Surgeons curiously excluded and/or non-participants in much work to date
7. Scene Setting To Err is Human* and
Crossing the Quality
Chasm**
Fundamental conflict with
extreme risks and/or anxiety about
professional liability issues
Relative success with SIP
Promise of reassertion of physician
leadership
8. Kentucky–A Favorable Platform for Special Study University of Kentucky Medical Center (UKMC) alpha test site for National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP/VA)
Early quality initiatives at Norton Hospital
Quality Surgical Solutions
Health Care Excel of Kentucky
9. What is QSS? 66 surgical specialists
15 hospitals
12 cities
2 health plans
43 protocols/current procedural technology (CPT) codes
BETTER PRACTICES
10. Specialties Representedin QSS General surgery to include trauma, digestive, vascular, colorectal, oncology, endoscopy
Orthopedic, otolaryngologic, urologic, gynecologic surgery
11. Fundamental Hypotheses Better quality surgical care is associated
with reduced direct and overall expenses
Physician–led initiatives work
Commitment to prove concepts and
ethically reward its doctors
Only effective public role is that of patient advocate
12. Record ofAchievement Locally Confidentiality of data
Prompt spread of agreed upon goals
Surgeons more prone to emulate other surgeons
13. Create an Environment of Transformational Change Innovate, report, refine, publish
Quality Improvement Conference
Value of the “near miss” and the praise of heroes and heroines
Examine routine and/or outdated printed orders
14. Personal Role–Generally Helpful Accept secondary and tertiary referrals without pain
Longstanding commitment to surgical excellence
Trained (partly or fully) many of Kentucky’s surgical specialists
Halo effect of QSS and having discussed it with hundreds of surgeons and administrative leaders
Personalized letters seeking surgeon support for SCIP through their hospitals
15. Which Six… and Why? A Lap GB D CABG/valve
B Hysterectomy E CR resections
C Major vascular F Total Knee/Hip
____________________________________
Not limited to Medicare beneficiaries
Primarily large volume hospitals
Significant complications and death
16. Recruitment for SCIP Pilot Group meetings for potential hospital participants and often their surgical specialists
Follow-up meetings, letters, and telephone calls
Recognition of the impact of current data submissions with invisible or meaningless feedback
17. Conference Calls Interest groups for each procedure
Lewis, Garrison, Polk, Van Vlack, and 2-5 specialists for the procedure
Prolonged sessions
Physicians very knowledgeable of current literature
Immediate agreement on process measures
and feedback
18. Detailed Developmentof QSS Involvement Laborious development of doctor report forms
Alpha test of forms
Surgeon-leader reports
Begin to match hospital and surgeon reports
Broad-based education–laboratory for student success (LSS), grand rounds, collaboratives
19. An Overview Hospital contributions
- Multiple procedures and surgeons
Honest sampling
Detailed, accurate abstraction
- Tremendous enthusiasm
Surgeon contributions
- Pre- and postop data
Detailed outcomes
Documentation of patient education
20. Unique Opportunity to Match Hospital and Physician Reporting More complete outcomes
Validation of accuracy for both methods of reporting
Consolidate surgeon and hospital performance into homogenous profile of quality
21. Patient Education Far better done in surgical specialists’ offices–how to document and promulgate
How can we quantitate and then assess quality?
Discussion
22. Atmosphere that Promotes Patient Safety Near miss and specific praise for the hero or heroine
Value of the process that targets the very rare disaster
The analogy between a plane crash and a pulmonary embolus–prophylaxis of the latter carries both risks and costs
23. “We have achieved our goals in reining in the professional liability dragon.” Physicians must now take the lead in identifying and solving problems of patient safety. We are now more protected than ever and can be the patient advocate we all want to be.
Allow doctors to clearly identify methods that provide improved quality.
June, 2004 G.E. McGee, M.D., FACS
24. Peer-Reviewed Publications Allen JW, DeSimone KJ. Valid peer review for surgeons working in small hospitals. Am J Surg 2002;184:16-18.
Allen JW, Hahm TX, Polk HC Jr. Surgeon-led initiatives cut costs and enhance the quality of endoscopic and laparoscopic procedures. J Soc Laparosc Surg 2003;7:243-247.
Galandiuk S, Rao MK, Heine MJ, et al. Mutual reporting of process and outcomes enhances quality outcomes for colon and rectal surgery. Surgery 2004; 136:833-841. [Presented at the Annual Meeting of the Central Surgical Association, March 2004].
McCafferty MH, Polk HC Jr. Addition of “near-miss” cases enhances a quality improvement conference. Arch Surg 2004;139:216-217.
Shively EH, Heine MJ, Schell R, et al. Practicing surgeons lead in quality care, safety, and cost control. Ann Surg 2004;239:752-762 [Presented at the Annual Meeting of the Southern Surgical Association, 2003].
Galandiuk S, Carter MB, Abby M, eds. When to Refer to a Surgeon. St. Louis, MO: Quality Medical Publishing, 2001.
25. A multifaceted endeavor with the ultimate goal of significantly improving surgical care in the United States through the prevention of complications associated with surgery
27. The Elements of SCIP The Partnership
The Program
The Pilot
28. The SCIP Partnership
A coalition of organizations interested in:
the improvement of surgical care through the reduction of post-operative complications
the development of performance measures and a data collection tool
29. SCIP Partners
Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ)
American College of Surgeons (ACS)
American Hospital Association (AHA)
American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA)
Association of periOperative Registered Nurses (AORN)
30. SCIP Partners continued
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)
Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS)
Department of Veteran Affairs (VA)
Joint Commission on Accreditation of Healthcare Organizations (JCAHO)
Institute for Healthcare Improvement (IHI)
31. The SCIP Program
Technical elements, consisting of process measures (including specifications), outcome measures (including appropriate risk adjustment methods), and the “SPOT” database and electronic data collection tool
32. The SCIP Pilot
A Medicare demonstration pilot designed to assess the feasibility of engaging private sector hospitals to reduce the incidence of post-operative morbidity and mortality
33. Where Do We GoFrom Here? Completion of pilot data collection
Final reports
Finalization of performance measures
for 8th SoW
National rollout
34. For more information… Visit the National SCIP Web site
http://www.medqic.org/scip
Contact the Kentucky Medicare QIO
kyscip@kyqio.sdps.org
(800) 300-8190
Contact Quality Surgical Solutions
http://www.qualitysurgical.com
(502) 583-7579