An official American thoracic society workshop report: Developing performance measures from clinical practice guidelines

Jeremy M. Kahn, Michael K. Gould, Jerry A. Krishnan, Kevin C. Wilson, David H. Au, Colin R. Cooke, Ivor S. Douglas, Laura C. Feemster, Richard A. Mularski, Christopher G. Slatore, Renda Soylemez Wiener

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

16 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Many health care performance measures are either not based on high-quality clinical evidence or not tightly linked to patientcentered outcomes, limiting their usefulness in quality improvement. In this report we summarize the proceedings of an American Thoracic Society workshop convened to address this problem by reviewing current approaches to performance measure development and creating a framework for developing high-quality performance measures by basing them directly on recommendations from wellconstructed clinical practice guidelines. Workshop participants concluded that ideally performance measures addressing care processes should be linked to clinical practice guidelines that explicitly rate the quality of evidence and the strength of recommendations, such as the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) process. Under this framework, process-based performance measures would only be developed from strong recommendations based on high- or moderate-quality evidence. This approach would help ensure that clinical processes specified in performance measures are both of clear benefit to patients and supported by strong evidence. Although this approach may result in fewer performance measures, it would substantially increase the likelihood that quality-improvement programs based on these measures actually improve patient care.

Original languageEnglish (US)
JournalAnnals of the American Thoracic Society
Volume11
Issue number4
DOIs
StatePublished - 2014
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Quality Improvement
Practice Guidelines
Thorax
Education
Patient Care
Delivery of Health Care

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine
  • Medicine(all)

Cite this

An official American thoracic society workshop report : Developing performance measures from clinical practice guidelines. / Kahn, Jeremy M.; Gould, Michael K.; Krishnan, Jerry A.; Wilson, Kevin C.; Au, David H.; Cooke, Colin R.; Douglas, Ivor S.; Feemster, Laura C.; Mularski, Richard A.; Slatore, Christopher G.; Wiener, Renda Soylemez.

In: Annals of the American Thoracic Society, Vol. 11, No. 4, 2014.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Kahn, JM, Gould, MK, Krishnan, JA, Wilson, KC, Au, DH, Cooke, CR, Douglas, IS, Feemster, LC, Mularski, RA, Slatore, CG & Wiener, RS 2014, 'An official American thoracic society workshop report: Developing performance measures from clinical practice guidelines', Annals of the American Thoracic Society, vol. 11, no. 4. https://doi.org/10.1513/AnnalsATS.201403-106ST
Kahn, Jeremy M. ; Gould, Michael K. ; Krishnan, Jerry A. ; Wilson, Kevin C. ; Au, David H. ; Cooke, Colin R. ; Douglas, Ivor S. ; Feemster, Laura C. ; Mularski, Richard A. ; Slatore, Christopher G. ; Wiener, Renda Soylemez. / An official American thoracic society workshop report : Developing performance measures from clinical practice guidelines. In: Annals of the American Thoracic Society. 2014 ; Vol. 11, No. 4.
@article{d37fbf86d3324607bc5e44a29ba101f3,
title = "An official American thoracic society workshop report: Developing performance measures from clinical practice guidelines",
abstract = "Many health care performance measures are either not based on high-quality clinical evidence or not tightly linked to patientcentered outcomes, limiting their usefulness in quality improvement. In this report we summarize the proceedings of an American Thoracic Society workshop convened to address this problem by reviewing current approaches to performance measure development and creating a framework for developing high-quality performance measures by basing them directly on recommendations from wellconstructed clinical practice guidelines. Workshop participants concluded that ideally performance measures addressing care processes should be linked to clinical practice guidelines that explicitly rate the quality of evidence and the strength of recommendations, such as the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) process. Under this framework, process-based performance measures would only be developed from strong recommendations based on high- or moderate-quality evidence. This approach would help ensure that clinical processes specified in performance measures are both of clear benefit to patients and supported by strong evidence. Although this approach may result in fewer performance measures, it would substantially increase the likelihood that quality-improvement programs based on these measures actually improve patient care.",
author = "Kahn, {Jeremy M.} and Gould, {Michael K.} and Krishnan, {Jerry A.} and Wilson, {Kevin C.} and Au, {David H.} and Cooke, {Colin R.} and Douglas, {Ivor S.} and Feemster, {Laura C.} and Mularski, {Richard A.} and Slatore, {Christopher G.} and Wiener, {Renda Soylemez}",
year = "2014",
doi = "10.1513/AnnalsATS.201403-106ST",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "11",
journal = "Annals of the American Thoracic Society",
issn = "2325-6621",
publisher = "American Thoracic Society",
number = "4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - An official American thoracic society workshop report

T2 - Developing performance measures from clinical practice guidelines

AU - Kahn, Jeremy M.

AU - Gould, Michael K.

AU - Krishnan, Jerry A.

AU - Wilson, Kevin C.

AU - Au, David H.

AU - Cooke, Colin R.

AU - Douglas, Ivor S.

AU - Feemster, Laura C.

AU - Mularski, Richard A.

AU - Slatore, Christopher G.

AU - Wiener, Renda Soylemez

PY - 2014

Y1 - 2014

N2 - Many health care performance measures are either not based on high-quality clinical evidence or not tightly linked to patientcentered outcomes, limiting their usefulness in quality improvement. In this report we summarize the proceedings of an American Thoracic Society workshop convened to address this problem by reviewing current approaches to performance measure development and creating a framework for developing high-quality performance measures by basing them directly on recommendations from wellconstructed clinical practice guidelines. Workshop participants concluded that ideally performance measures addressing care processes should be linked to clinical practice guidelines that explicitly rate the quality of evidence and the strength of recommendations, such as the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) process. Under this framework, process-based performance measures would only be developed from strong recommendations based on high- or moderate-quality evidence. This approach would help ensure that clinical processes specified in performance measures are both of clear benefit to patients and supported by strong evidence. Although this approach may result in fewer performance measures, it would substantially increase the likelihood that quality-improvement programs based on these measures actually improve patient care.

AB - Many health care performance measures are either not based on high-quality clinical evidence or not tightly linked to patientcentered outcomes, limiting their usefulness in quality improvement. In this report we summarize the proceedings of an American Thoracic Society workshop convened to address this problem by reviewing current approaches to performance measure development and creating a framework for developing high-quality performance measures by basing them directly on recommendations from wellconstructed clinical practice guidelines. Workshop participants concluded that ideally performance measures addressing care processes should be linked to clinical practice guidelines that explicitly rate the quality of evidence and the strength of recommendations, such as the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) process. Under this framework, process-based performance measures would only be developed from strong recommendations based on high- or moderate-quality evidence. This approach would help ensure that clinical processes specified in performance measures are both of clear benefit to patients and supported by strong evidence. Although this approach may result in fewer performance measures, it would substantially increase the likelihood that quality-improvement programs based on these measures actually improve patient care.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84903574812&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84903574812&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1513/AnnalsATS.201403-106ST

DO - 10.1513/AnnalsATS.201403-106ST

M3 - Article

C2 - 24828810

AN - SCOPUS:84903574812

VL - 11

JO - Annals of the American Thoracic Society

JF - Annals of the American Thoracic Society

SN - 2325-6621

IS - 4

ER -