1 / 10

HIT Standards Committee

HIT Standards Committee. Report of the Clinical Quality Workgroup Janet Corrigan, Chair Floyd Eisenberg July 21, 2009. Clinical Quality Workgroup --Process. CQ Workgroup conference calls June 22, 2009 July 15, 2009 Consultation/Coordination with Policy Committee

ira
Download Presentation

HIT Standards Committee

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. HIT Standards Committee Report of the Clinical Quality Workgroup Janet Corrigan, Chair Floyd Eisenberg July 21, 2009

  2. Clinical Quality Workgroup --Process CQ Workgroup conference calls June 22, 2009 July 15, 2009 Consultation/Coordination with Policy Committee July 9, 2009 (Meaningful Use Workgroup) July 16, 2009 (Policy Committee)

  3. CQ Workgroup Initial Tasks Identify potential set of existing standardized performance measures that correspond to the Policy Committee’s quality measure concepts Identify the “data types” that must be captured to calculate the measures Handoff to Clinical Operations Workgroup to identify HIT standards

  4. Sources of Measures National Quality Forum (NQF) Database Over 500 endorsed measures Pipeline measures Includes measures used by Centers for Medicare & Medicaid (CMS) (in PQRI and RHQDAPU), Hospital Quality Alliance, accrediting entities, and Physician Consortium for Performance Improvement

  5. Identify Data Types Health Information Technology Expert Panel (HITEP) Convened by NQF; supported by Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) Identify a “Quality Data Set” Types of data necessary to calculate and report on performance Currently includes over 56 “data types”

  6. Performance Measure Set for 2011 Includes 27 performance measures (see handout) Provisional recommendations Detailed review of measures by CQ Workgroup not yet complete CO Workgroup identification of HIT standards not yet complete Significant measure “retooling” required Efforts underway to ascertain feasibility Seeking Standards Committee approval with understanding that there will need to be some changes

  7. Performance Measures: Key Challenges Measure Gaps E.g., % reportable lab results; % patients with access to educational resources For 2011 attestation is likely method of data collection Available measures developed assuming more limited availability of data Fail to take advantage of clinically-rich data in EHRs E.g., % patients at high risk for cardiac events on aspirin prophylaxis

  8. Performance Measures: Key Challenges Some measures rely on data types that will be challenging to capture in 2011 E.g., BMI, vital signs May be necessary to have different measure specifications for 2011 and 2013 (e.g., ICD-9 for 2011 and SNOMED for 2013) Some measures require data for which there is currently no standardized method of collecting E.g., VTE (antithrombotic devices)

  9. Performance Measures: Key Challenges Some measures require data that may be costly to collect Lipid profile Significant harmonization issues Measures should be patient-centered Current measures vary across settings (e.g., hospital, ambulatory, LTC) and age groups (e.g., BMI measure for children differs from BMI for adults)

  10. Next Steps Detailed review of individual measures underway Identify any necessary changes in measures Provide guidance to measure stewards regarding “retooling” Develop a 2-dimensinal framework for classifying measures Degree of readiness of a measure for 2011 implementation Level of performance expectations (i.e., threshold considerations)

More Related