Measurement for the sake of measurement makes no sense

Often over the past decade we have decried the rush to measurement.  For those who believe that we can measure quality easily. Enthusiasts have advocated for P4P without any data supporting this intrusion.  Now the Annals of Internal Medicine has published a review that features this conclusion: Pay-for-performance programs may be associated with improved processes of care in ambulatory settings, but consistently positive associations with improved health outcomes have not been demonstrated in any setting. Will this end the P4P madness?  Any practicing physician can explain the negatives of P4P programs – data collection, focus on what is being measured rather than what the patient prioritizes. The Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine has this wonderful essay – It Matters What Is Measured In this essay, the author – Michael LeFevre, MD, MSPH – addresses several important issues.  First he discusses the idiocy of recording a review of systems at each outpatient visit (and this also relates to inpatient visits).  His entire discussion is worthwhile, but I will highlight this sentence: The third and perhaps most important reason to reconsider the ROS is that payers are assigning value to it, when its value has not been demonstrated. This is a recurrent them in the world of “quality”.  Someone, usually not a practicing physician, develops a rationale for a measure.  But they almost never test the measure to see its impact on...
Source: DB's Medical Rants - Category: Internal Medicine Authors: Tags: Medical Rants Source Type: blogs