Difference between revisions of "Quality Roadmap"
Chrisdcarr (talk | contribs) |
Chrisdcarr (talk | contribs) |
||
Line 66: | Line 66: | ||
| | | | ||
| | | | ||
+ | |- | ||
+ | |Patient assessment to prevent adverse events | ||
+ | | | ||
+ | | | ||
+ | | | ||
+ | | | ||
+ | |||
|- | |- | ||
|Adverse event reporting | |Adverse event reporting | ||
+ | |||
+ | |||
+ | | | ||
+ | | | ||
+ | | | ||
| | | | ||
+ | |- | ||
|Measure Reporting | |Measure Reporting | ||
Core Measure Reporting | Core Measure Reporting | ||
− | + | | | |
− | + | |ACR creating workgroup to develop measures for PQRI program | |
| | | | ||
| | | |
Revision as of 15:01, 22 May 2007
Legend
Priority:
Prerequisites: List of applicable standards Coordination: Other domains to coordinate efforts with. |
Strategy:
Year: Earliest Opportunity given prerequisites, priority and skills. |
Roadmap
Topic | Pri | Standards/Prerequesites | Coord | Strategy | Year |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Peer Review | ACR RadPeer program
Peer review and feedback |
||||
Decision support for ordering and procedure approvals | Massachusetts program
Based on ACR appropriateness criteria (consult with Dr. Keith Dreyer/MGH) Generate justification data when needed (through use of QED?) AQA development of appropriateness metrics for imaging efficiency and cost effectiveness |
||||
Retrospective review of outcomes based on utilization of evolving technologies | |||||
Radiation dose
Appropriate aggregation of dose information Minimization of dose to patient population |
|||||
Real-time documentation of continuing education and accreditation (point-of-care CME) | |||||
Patient assessment to prevent adverse events | |||||
Adverse event reporting
|
|||||
Measure Reporting
Core Measure Reporting |
ACR creating workgroup to develop measures for PQRI program | ||||
Data registries | Procedure-specific datasets
Gathering quality data (peer review, patient safety, etc.) from various care settings Intermediary point to aggregate date to share with CMS, other destination agencies Protocols in place and physician use of protocols |
||||
Standardized reporting: develop standard formats for reports (eg, Echo, Cath Lab, Nuc Med) to ensure report has elements needed to collect quality data | |||||
Consumer aspects of quality reporting | PHR as record of repeat procedures
Consumer view of provider quality information Patient self management Home health monitoring Informed patient consent |
||||
Harmonization with other initiatives
a. Uniformity of measure import and export formats b. Measuring health delivery disparities across demographic segments (eg, race, gender, socioeconomic status) - AHA Health Research and Educational Trust, HRSA c. Care coordination efforts across disciplines - NQF, CMS d. Structural measures - different groups, data measures (eg, infection control) e. NCVHS hearings in July f. State/provincial/regional quality measures g. AHIC/ONC/HITSP Use Case on Quality i. Patient identity management/tracking of patients across settings h. Expected AHIC/ONC/HITSP Use Case on Adverse Events 3. Consumer aspects of quality reporting a. PHR as record of repeat procedures b. Consumer view of provider quality information c. Patient self management d. Home health monitoring e. Informed patient consent |