Oral

The five conclusions for this session are as follows: 1.PPR and VBP (derived methods) are distributed with lower centrals and wider variances while, OPR, APR and AIR are distributed closed with higher centrals and smaller variances 2.Discussion of change strategies and best practice models will include work with national accreditation and quality improvement organizations, state government purchaser and regulatory agencies, hospital and health systems, health plans, local health departments, community health centers, physician associations, employer and purchaser associations, ethnic media and consumer and community-based organizations 3.Physician-specific P4P incentives, developed with the input from participating physicians, can improve indicators of ambulatory care quality, at least for the dimensions tied to the incentives 4.The supply/demand mismatch represents a major limitation to improve patient satisfaction and primary care continuity 5.The PPV of five PSIs in a nonrandom but representative sample of US hospitals varied from 49% to 90%, depending on the specific PSI and on how denominator exclusions are handled

Session Objectives: There are five objectives for this session. To: 1.Introduce comparison methods to understand the different composite scores and data structure 2.Identify at least three change strategies for improving patient-centered and equitable care 3.Recognize how different quality indicators are affected by the physician incentive program 4.Illustrate implementation, key metrics of improvement, and limitations of an advanced access model in a community health center 5.Evaluate the positive predictive value of the AHRQ Patient Safety Indicators, based on data from a national sample of hospitals

CE Credits: CME, Health Education (CHES), Nursing