FREE DAILY AND WEEKLY NEWSLETTERS OFFERED BY CONTENT OF INTEREST
Did you find this article relevant? Subscribe to UroToday-GUOncToday!
The fields of GU Oncology and Urology are advancing rapidly including new treatments, enrolling clinical trials, screening and surveillance recommendations along with updated guidelines. Join us as one of our subscribers who rely on UroToday as their must-read source for the latest news and data on drugs. Sign up today for blogs, video conversations, conference highlights and abstracts from peer-review publications by disease and condition delivered to your inbox and read on the go.
According to Dr. Venkatesh, there are four cross-cutting measures of the future, including (i) team-based quality measurement, (ii) population ownership, (iii) patient reported outcomes, and (iv) cost and resource use. Measuring team-based care across settings will have implications for the patient, clinician, and the system, leading to a shared accountability metric. For example, community-level catheter associated UTI rates provide an opportunity to align institutional (hospital, skilled nursing facilities, etc) measurement with providers and supporting the development of “healthy communities.” There are several unanswered questions regarding team-based measurement, such as (i) Are clinicians ready to agree on good outcomes? (ii) Are clinicians ready to share accountability? (iii) Will clinicians engage colleague in quality goals? and (iv) Is this possible within the current payment model?
Patient reported outcome measurements provide an opportunity to capture broader patient populations, pair with shared decision-making measures, and shift the focus to patient-defined improvement. As Dr. Venkatesh cautions, this will require substantial reduction in clinical paternalism. There are several cost measurement challenges we face moving forward, including (i) common conflating of cost and resource use, (ii) retrospective patient assignment (iii) poor decision-cost linkage in existing data, and (iv) poor clarity with regards to how we use this initiative alongside the alternative payment model.
Dr. Venkatesh concluded is talk with highlighting a few points with regards to the possible “next rabbit hole”: proportional attribution. Namely, we risk a false or oversimplified representation of care, promote silos, noting that attribution is not necessary for alternative payment model success (balancing quality measures IS necessary), which is ultimately rarely meaningful to patients.
Speaker(s): Arjun Venkatesh, Yale University, New Haven, CT, USA
Written by: Zachary Klaassen, MD, Urologic Oncology Fellow, University of Toronto, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, Twitter: @zklaassen_md, at the AUA Quality Improvement Summit - October 21, 2017- Linthicum, Maryland