It has been almost 15 years since the American College of Gastroenterology and American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy established the Task Force on Quality Endoscopy and published the first set of quality indicators for GI endoscopic procedures.
Dr. Mehul Lalani
This work was motivated by two seminal reports on patient safety that fostered a demand by the public, policy makers, and payers to accurately define and measure the quality of health care services.
While the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services initially designated and required reporting on several basic outcome measures, leaders within the field of gastroenterology recognized the importance of developing evidence-based quality measures for our field, and specifically for endoscopic procedures.
Integrating safety measures into our daily operations has always been important, and over the years, policies have been implemented to incentivize health care providers to meet standards in everything from patient safety to patient satisfaction.
Defining quality and how to measure it
The goals of implementing quality measures within private practices include effective patient care and safety, but they also include issues like access and affordability, as well as the professionalism of your physicians and advanced practice providers.
As a larger practice, we have the resources to support a quality coordinator who spends half their time focused on quality measures. Every provider is required to complete annual education on quality parameters.
We have two committees that propose and track quality initiatives in our practice. We have one on the practice side and one for our ambulatory surgery centers (ASCs). The committees are made of physicians who have a particular interest in quality measures. On the ASC side, our ASC center director from our management partner AmSurg is also a member of the committee.
The road to improving quality within a private practice starts by defining the aspects of care that affect the quality of the patient experience.
Tracking quality in the office and in the surgery center
In our practices we have about 60 physicians. Start times and coding accuracy are good examples of what we have tracked in the past as areas of quality improvement. For instance, if only one or two providers get started late, it can cause a domino effect. Schedules get cramped, which can increase stress and possibly cause our team members to rush. Even things that seem like patient satisfaction issues can affect patient care, so it is important to make sure they are being measured.
On the ASC side, we track adenoma detection rates, colonoscopy intervals, complication rates, and many other additional criteria. As an example, when a pathology report is issued, we require our physicians to provide results to our patients within 72 hours.
Data on all providers are tabulated quarterly and then distributed to the providers in the form of a scorecard. The scorecard is then used for constructive feedback on improvements that can be made. A cumulative annual report is given to the providers, which is also incorporated into reviews. Not paying attention to quality measures can potentially have financial ramifications for providers in our group.
