The New England Journal of Medicine
e-mail icon  FREE NEJM E-TOC    HOME   |   SUBSCRIBE   |   CURRENT ISSUE   |   PAST ISSUES   |   COLLECTIONS   |    Advanced Search
Sign in | Get NEJM's E-Mail Table of Contents — Free | Subscribe
 
Special Article
PreviousPrevious
Volume 353:255-264 July 21, 2005 Number 3
NextNext

Quality of Care in U.S. Hospitals as Reflected by Standardized Measures, 2002–2004
Scott C. Williams, Psy.D., Stephen P. Schmaltz, Ph.D., David J. Morton, M.S., Richard G. Koss, M.A., and Jerod M. Loeb, Ph.D.

 Sign up for free e-toc
 

This Article
-Full Text
- PDF
-PDA Full Text

Commentary
-Editorial
 by Romano, P. S.
-Letters

Tools and Services
-Add to Personal Archive
-Add to Citation Manager
-Notify a Friend
-E-mail When Cited
-E-mail When Letters Appear

More Information
-PubMed Citation
ABSTRACT

Background In July 2002, the Joint Commission on Accreditation of Healthcare Organizations implemented standardized performance measures that were designed to track the performance of accredited hospitals and encourage improvement in the quality of health care.

Methods We examined hospitals' performance on 18 standardized indicators of the quality of care for acute myocardial infarction, heart failure, and pneumonia. One measure assessed a clinical outcome (death in the hospital after acute myocardial infarction), and the other 17 measures assessed processes of care. Data were collected over a two-year period in more than 3000 accredited hospitals. All participating hospitals received quarterly feedback in the form of comparative reports throughout the study.

Results Descriptive analysis revealed a significant improvement (P<0.01) in the performance of U.S. hospitals on 15 of 18 measures, and no measure showed a significant deterioration. The magnitude of improvement ranged from 3 percent to 33 percent during the eight quarters studied. For 16 of the 17 process-of-care measures, hospitals with a low level of performance at baseline had greater improvements over the subsequent two years than hospitals with a high level of performance at baseline.

Conclusions Over a two-year period, we observed consistent improvement in measures reflecting the process of care for acute myocardial infarction, heart failure, and pneumonia. Both quantitative and qualitative research are needed to explore the reasons for these improvements.


Source Information

From the Joint Commission on Accreditation of Healthcare Organizations, Division of Research, Oakbrook Terrace, Ill.

Address reprint requests to Dr. Williams at the Joint Commission on Accreditation of Healthcare Organizations, 1 Renaissance Blvd., Oakbrook Terrace, IL 60181, or at swilliams{at}jcaho.org.

Full Text of this Article


Related Letters:

Quality of Care in U.S. Hospitals
Robbins R. A., Klotz S. A., Bender B. S., Saver B. G., Williams S. C., Loeb J. M., Jha A. K., Epstein A. M.
Extract | Full Text | PDF  
N Engl J Med 2005; 353:1860-1861, Oct 27, 2005. Correspondence

This article has been cited by other articles:



HOME  |  SUBSCRIBE  |  SEARCH  |  CURRENT ISSUE  |  PAST ISSUES  |  COLLECTIONS  |  PRIVACY  |  HELP  |  beta.nejm.org

Comments and questions? Please contact us.

The New England Journal of Medicine is owned, published, and copyrighted © 2008 Massachusetts Medical Society. All rights reserved.