Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
ON
Quality
A n e w s l e t t e r a b o u t O h i o s h e a lt h c a r e q u a l i t y i m p r ov e m e n t
SAFE JOURNEY
11
CALENDAR/REMINDERS
13
REGULATORY UPDATE
14
15
Safe Journey
Process Mapping
Getting Started
FROM PAGE 3
Making improvements.
Determine what changes need to be made
to improve performance at each step.
An abbreviated example of a process map is
illustrated in Figure 1.
Fig. 1: Sample Process Map
Resident is
admitted
Charge nurse
completes Braden
Scale on day of
admission
90%
Resident is
discharged
Charge nurse
completes visual
skin inspection
within two hours
of admission
50%
Note: This is an abbreviated example of process mapping. The percentages listed in the diagram reflect
how often each step is carried out completely and accurately.
Staying focused.
Other important issues are often uncovered
through process mapping, but these should be set
aside for discussion in separate meetings.
Discharge Appeals
DRG Reviews
FROM PAGE 5
Fig. 2: Ohio KePRO Quality of Care Reviews, 2008
73.78%
Cases resolved at
physician reviewer second
review (2P)
17.98%
Cases confirmed at
physician reviewer second
review (2P)
5.98% 2.25%
Source: Case Review Information Systems (CRIS) data, 2008
Quality of care reviews are performed on all cases submitted to Ohio KePRO, regardless of the
review type (appeals, DRG reviews, or utilization reviews). All beneficiary complaints undergo a
quality of care review. These calls are directed by the Helpline operator to a nurse reviewer, who
then requests the medical records and sends the chart to a physician reviewer. For such cases, we
are careful to perform a specialty and like practice match, meaning that we always ensure that the
physician reviewer has the same area of specialization as the physician under review, and we attempt
to select a reviewer who also practices in a like setting. In order to facilitate the most accurate
review possible, we try to avoid, for example, sending a chart from a tertiary medical center to a
small town practice, and vice versa. As with other reviews, the provider and practitioner are given an
opportunity for discussion, and an opportunity for reconsideration when appropriate.
When a quality of care concern is identified, Ohio KePRO initiates action with the provider or
practitioner, which can range from a simple letter with suggestions for future care to a complete
quality improvement plan (QIP). In cases calling for QIPs, we work with the provider or
practitioner to formulate a corrective action plan, and monitor the implementation through selfreporting mechanisms.
Last year, Ohio KePRO conducted 2,441 quality of care reviews. Details are provided in Figure 2.
- Jennifer Bitterman, RHIA, MBA
Review Director
jbitterman@ohqio.sdps.org
PROMOTING
PREVENTIVE CARE
Ohio has been struggling economically for the past decade, but has been
particularly hard-hit by the recent economic downturn. Our state ranks 7th
in foreclosures, and as of December 2008, Ohio saw an increase of 9 percent
in Food Stamp program recipients and an increase of 2 percent in the
unemployment rate over the previous year.1 With these grim statistics, it may
come as no surprise that fewer Ohioans are making non-emergent care such as
preventive services a priority.
FROM PAGE 7
Medicare-covered services.
Breast cancer screenings and colorectal cancer
screenings are covered by Medicare.
Ohios economic climate will be a challenge
for all of us as we strive to meet our goals in
improving patient care, but we encourage you
to remind your patients of the importance of
preventive services. Visit our Web site
(www.ohiokepro.com) to access no-cost
tools and interventions, or look for resources
from community-based services such as
Susan G. Komen for the Cure, regional
organizations, and county health departments.
Source: CMS claims data for Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries aged 50-80
MRSA SURVEILLANCE
SYSTEMS: THEN & NOW
ethicillin-resistant Staphylococcus
aureus (MRSA) hasnt exactly been
a household name, but MRSA
infections have been in the U.S. for
the past four decades.1 And, with
recent coverage in local and national
news publications such as The New
York Times2 and The Washington
Post3 identifying the infection as a
staph superbug, its clear that the
publics interest is increasing.
FROM PAGE 9
Nursing Home
Disparities Project
Background
Methodology
QI/QM Measure
1.2 Falls
2.1 Depression
4.1 Cognitive Impairment
5.3 Incontinent w/o Toileting Plan
7.1 Weight Loss
8.1 Pain
9.1 ADL Decline
10.1 Antipsychotic Use
11.1 Restraints
12.1 Pressure Ulcers
State
Average
Score
Rural
Facilities
Average
Score
Urban
Facilities
Average
Score
Rural
Variation
from State
Average
14.4%
19.3%
11.7%
51.4%
9.4%
7.9%
13.9%
19.2%
4.8%
12.7%
19.1%
29.6%
21.1%
76.5%
12.8%
13.8%
21.7%
31.3%
9.1%
17.7%
19.2%
28.1%
24.4%
80.2%
13.5%
14.1%
21.2%
29.0%
10.4%
18.5%
4.7%
10.3%
9.4%
25.1%
3.4%
5.9%
7.8%
12.1%
4.3%
5.0%
Urban
Variation
from State
Average
4.8%
8.8%
12.7%
28.8%
4.1%
6.2%
7.3%
9.8%
5.6%
5.8%
FROM PAGE 11
FROM PAGE 11
Results
Results
Source:
Source:CMS
CMSCASPER
CASPERdata,
data,3Q08
3Q08
12
12 SPOTLIGHT
SPOTLIGHTON
ONQUALITY
QUALITY SPRING
SPRING2009
2009
Conclusion
Conclusion
This study revealed no disparity between urban and rural
This
studyhomes
revealed
between
rural
nursing
in no
thedisparity
state of Ohio
forurban
theth 4thand
Quarter
nursing
homes
in
the
state
of
Ohio
for
the
4
Quarter
2008 QI/QM measures selected. Despite these
2008 QI/QM measures selected. Despite these
findings, there is reason to consider further subdivision
findings, there is reason to consider further subdivision
of the urban facilities (i.e., suburban and true urban)
of the urban facilities (i.e., suburban and true urban)
to determine if disparities are seen between the more
to determine if disparities are seen between the more
finely grouped locations. A possible differentiation in
finely grouped locations. A possible differentiation in
the suburban areas is expected because factors that were
the suburban areas is expected because factors that were
previously considered to be rural issuessuch as higher
previously considered to be rural issuessuch as higher
unemployment,
lower
literacy
and
lack
medical
unemployment,
lower
literacy
and
lack
of of
medical
treatmentare
now
prevalent
in
urban
areas
as well.
treatmentare now prevalent in urban areas as well.
Thiswill
will
examined
next
reporting
period.
This
bebe
examined
in in
thethe
next
reporting
period.
Other
factors
will
examined
subsequent
reports
Other
factors
will
bebe
examined
in in
subsequent
reports
in in
this
series,
including
ethnicity/race,
facility
characteristics,
this series, including ethnicity/race, facility characteristics,
environmental
factors,
and
socioeconomic
factors.
environmental
factors,
and
socioeconomic
factors.
- Rikki
Gruden,
- Rikki
Gruden,
BABA
Health
Data
Analyst
Health
Data
Analyst
rgruden@ohqio.sdps.org
rgruden@ohqio.sdps.org
Linda
Stokes,
MSPH,
ABD
- Linda
Stokes,
MSPH,
ABD
Senior
Scientist
Senior Scientist
lstokes@ohqio.sdps.org
lstokes@ohqio.sdps.org
1 National
Rural
Health
Association.
Long-term
in rural
1 National
Rural
Health
Association.
Long-term
care care
in rural
America.
2001.
Available
at www.ruralhealthweb.org/
America.
MayMay
2001.
Available
at www.ruralhealthweb.org/
download.cfm?downloadfile=406F7351-1185-6B66-8848CE2
download.cfm?downloadfile=406F7351-1185-6B66-8848CE2
D9A21B8E8&typename=dmFile&fieldname=filename.
D9A21B8E8&typename=dmFile&fieldname=filename.
Accessed
January
19, 2009.
Accessed
January
19, 2009.
2 Coburn,
Fralich
JT, McGuire
C, Fortinsky
Variations
2 Coburn,
AF,AF,
Fralich
JT, McGuire
C, Fortinsky
RH.RH.
Variations
in outcomes
of care
in urban
nursing
facilities
in outcomes
of care
in urban
and and
ruralrural
nursing
facilities
in in
Maine.
Journal
of Applied
Gerontology.
1996;
15(2):
202-223.
Maine.
Journal
of Applied
Gerontology.
1996;
15(2):
202-223.
3 Phillips,
CD,CD,
Hawes
C, Williams
ML.ML.
Nursing
Homes
in Rural
3 Phillips,
Hawes
C, Williams
Nursing
Homes
in Rural
and
Urban
Areas,
2000.
College
Station,
TX:TX:
Texas
A&M
and
Urban
Areas,
2000.
College
Station,
Texas
A&M
University
System
Health
Science
Center,
School
of Rural
University
System
Health
Science
Center,
School
of Rural
Public
Health,
Southwest
Rural
Health
Research
Center;
2003.2003.
Public
Health,
Southwest
Rural
Health
Research
Center;
4 Phillips
CD,CD,
Hawes
C, Williams
ML.ML.
Nursing
Homes
in Rural
4 Phillips
Hawes
C, Williams
Nursing
Homes
in Rural
and
Urban
Areas,
2001.
College
Station,
TX:TX:
Texas
A&M
and
Urban
Areas,
2001.
College
Station,
Texas
A&M
University
System
Health
Science
Center,
School
of
Rural
University System Health Science Center, School of Rural
Public
Health,
Southwest
Rural
Health
Research
Center;
2004.2004.
Public
Health,
Southwest
Rural
Health
Research
Center;
5 Phillips
CD,CD,
Holan
S, Sherman
M, Williams
ML,ML,
Hawes
C. C.
5 Phillips
Holan
S, Sherman
M, Williams
Hawes
Rurality
andand
nursing
home
quality:
Results
fromfrom
a national
Rurality
nursing
home
quality:
Results
a national
sample
of
nursing
home
admissions.
American
Journal
of
sample of nursing home admissions. American Journal of
Public
Health.
2004;
94(10):
1717-1722.
Public
Health.
2004;
94(10):
1717-1722.
6 U.6 S.
Bureau.
United
States
Census
2000.
U.Census
S. Census
Bureau.
United
States
Census
2000.
Available
at www.census.gov/main/www/cen2000.html.
Available
at www.census.gov/main/www/cen2000.html.
Accessed
January
19,
2009.
Accessed January 19, 2009.
7 U.7 S.
of Commerce.
U.S.U.S.
Department
of of
U.Department
S. Department
of Commerce.
Department
Commerce
WebWeb
site.site.
Available
at www.commerce.gov/.
Commerce
Available
at www.commerce.gov/.
Accessed
January
19, 2009.
Accessed
January
19, 2009.
19
26
28
21
14
29
22
30
23
16
25
18
11
24
31
17
10
25
18
11
26
19
12
27
20
13
28
21
14
29
22
15
30
23
16
28
21
14
29
22
15
Tear out this calendar and post it as a reminder of upcoming deadlines and events.
24
17
10
May
30
23
16
24
17
10
June
25
18
11
26
19
12
Online resources. Weve added new online resources for healthcare providers to our
Web site, including those related to CMS, HCAHPS, ICD-10, and legislation. Just click on
the link from our home page, or go directly to the Healthcare Providers section at www.
ohiokepro.com/providers.asp.
Industry news and updates. Be sure to check our Web site (www.ohiokepro.com) for the
latest developments in healthcare.
July 8, 2009
Deadline for submission of 1Q09 HCAHPS
survey data.
July 1, 2009
Medical records due to the CDAC.
July
LOOKING AHEAD:
June 1, 2009
CDAC to send out 4Q08 validation chart
requests.
June
27
20
13
Hospitals
Reminders
May 1, 2009
Submit 4Q09 inpatient and outpatient ICD-9
population and sampling counts to the CDW.
April 8, 2009
Submit 4Q08 survey data to the Clinical Data
Warehouse (CDW).
April 7, 2009
World Health Day
May
Reporting Hospital Quality Data for Annual Payment Update (RHQDAPU) Program Calendar - 2Q09 reporting deadlines:
27
20
13
April
12
15
April
REGULATORY
UPDATE
QualityNet
Quest
The QualityNet Quest online question and answer
system is now available, with recent upgrades to
enhance performance and stability. Users may now
access Quest to submit questions regarding SDPS
applications, quality measures, communications
partnerships, and other Theme-specific issues, as well
as to perform searches of past Q&As based on
keyword or topic.
APU Dashboard
This new monitoring tool will help assess your
organizations status in terms of meeting RHQDAPU
program requirements. The dashboard provides a real-
time status report with links to specific QNet reports
providing greater detail. Contact your internal QNet
SA if you cannot currently access this dashboard report,
and would like to be able to do so.
QNet SAs
Each facility should have more than one designated
QualityNet Security Administrator (QNet SA).
Having a backup QNet SA allows work related to
CMS public reporting initiative to continue
uninterrupted if the primary contact is not available.
Contact Fran Hober at fhober@ohqio.sdps.org or 216-447-9607, ext. 2115 with any questions about CMS public
reporting program changes and deadlines.
Other Updates
Hospital Compare
Data on Medicares Hospital Compare site
(www.medicare.gov/hospital) were updated in March.
The Mortality Measures data were not updated, as this
information is updated annually; the next update of these
measures is scheduled for June 2009.
PEPPER
Review activity and reports Support for the Program for
Evaluation of Payment Patterns Electronic Report
(PEPPER) activity is no longer a component of the QIO
Program in the 9th Statement of Work. However, providers
may access valuable information on this topic at the
Hospital Payment Monitoring Program Web site
(www.hpmpresources.org), including:
RAC Program
CMS announced on February 2 that the parties
involved in protesting the award of contracts in the
Recovery Audit Contractor (RAC) Program settled
their protests. The stop work order has been lifted, and
CMS will now continue its implementation of the RAC
Program. Information on the program is available on
the CMS Web site at www.cms.hhs.gov/RAC/.
Presorted Standard
U.S. Postage
PAID
Cleveland, OH
Permit No. 882
SPOTLIGHT
ON
Quality
A n e w s l e t t e r a b o u t O h i o s h e a lt h c a r e q u a l i t y i m p r ov e m e n t
SAFE JOURNEY
9
11
CALENDAR/REMINDERS
13
REGULATORY UPDATE
14
15