PubMed Health⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

P G Shekelle

Publications and source records attributed to P G Shekelle.

At least 19 recordsLinked to original sources
PubMed2000

The public release of performance data: what do we expect to gain? A review of the evidence.

CONTEXT: Information about the performance of hospitals, health professionals, and health care organizations has been made public in the United States for more than a decade. The expected gains of public disclosure have not been made clear, and both the benefits and potential risks have received minimal empirical investigation. OBJECTIVE: To summarize the empirical evidence concerning public disclosure of performance data, relate the results to the potential gains, and identify areas requiring further research. DATA SOURCES: A literature search was conducted on MEDLINE and EMBASE databases for articles published between January 1986 and October 1999 in peer-reviewed journals. Review of citations, public documents, and expert advice was conducted to identify studies not found in the electronic databases. STUDY SELECTION: Descriptive, observational, or experimental evaluations of US reporting systems were selected for inclusion. DATA EXTRACTION: Included studies were organized based on use of public data by consumers, purchasers, physicians, and hospitals; impact on quality of care outcomes; and costs. DATA SYNTHESIS: Seven US reporting systems have been the subject of published empirical evaluations. Descriptive and observational methods predominate. Consumers and purchasers rarely search out the information and do not understand or trust it; it has a small, although increasing, impact on their decision making. Physicians are skeptical about such data and only a small proportion makes use of it. Hospitals appear to be most responsive to the data. In a limited number of studies, the publication of performance data has been associated with an improvement in health outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: There are several potential gains from the public disclosure of performance data, but use of the information by provider organizations for quality improvement may be the most productive area for further research.

Attitude to Health↗
PubMed2000

Does this patient need to be evaluated today? Designing a guideline-driven triage process to determine the timing of care for adults with respiratory infection symptoms.

BACKGROUND: Physicians and nurses often make judgments about the urgency with which patients require evaluation, yet few explicit process-of-care criteria are available to guide these decisions. Using a multidisciplinary expert physician panel and explicit, quantitative group judgment methods, standardized, clinically detailed deferred care criteria were developed to guide emergency department and ambulatory care triage decisions for same-day versus deferred care for patients with respiratory infection symptoms. METHODS: Using a modified Delphi process, an eight-member multidisciplinary expert physician panel rated the safety of deferred care for standardized clinical scenarios. The ratings were converted into explicit criteria and then compared with usual implicit judgment in terms of nurse triage times. RESULTS: The panel achieved 100% consensus on 36 critical clinical factors, each of which precludes deferring care for a patient with respiratory infection symptoms. Based on combinations of 12 additional clinical factors, 48 clinical scenarios were created that the panel rated for deferred care safety. Panelists' ratings agreed for 90% of clinical scenarios. These were formatted into screening criteria. Near-perfect interrater agreement (kappa = 0.9) was found in reproducibility testing. The difference in mean nurse triage times using the criteria compared with implicit nurse judgment was 0.4 minutes (95% confidence interval = -2.1 to 2.9 minutes). CONCLUSIONS: Application of explicit criteria for deferring care of patients with respiratory infection symptoms did not lengthen triage time. This approach may facilitate more efficient resource management for ambulatory settings. However, widespread use before these criteria's, our systematic criteria-based triage should be validated in multicenter clinical trials against an outcome standard and the more common implicit approach.

Adult↗
PubMed2000

Safely directing patients to appropriate levels of care: guideline-driven triage in the emergency service.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: We sought to develop and validate standardized clinical criteria to identify patients presenting to the emergency department whose care may be safely deferred to a later date in a nonemergency setting. METHODS: Using a modified Delphi process, a 17-member multidisciplinary physician panel developed explicit, standardized, deferred-care criteria. In a prospective cohort design, emergency nurses at a tertiary care Veterans Administration (VA) Medical Center, using the criteria, screened 1,187 consecutive ambulatory adult patients presenting with abdominal pain, musculoskeletal symptoms, or respiratory infection symptoms. Patients meeting deferred-care criteria were offered the option of an appointment within 1 week in the ambulatory care clinic at the study site; all other patients were offered same-day care. As outcome measures, we assessed nonelective hospitalizations for related conditions occurring within 7 days of evaluation at our facility or any other VA facility within a 300-mile radius, and we assessed 30-day all-cause mortality. RESULTS: Two hundred twenty-six (19%) patients met screening criteria for deferred care. Patients meeting deferred-care criteria experienced zero (95% confidence interval, 0% to 1.2%) related nonelective VA hospitalizations within 7 days of evaluation, and none died within 30 days. By contrast, 68 (7%) of 961 (95% confidence interval, 5.5% to 8.9%) patients who did not meet deferred-care criteria were hospitalized nonelectively for related conditions, and 5 (0.5%) died. CONCLUSION: By using hospitalization and 30-day mortality as safety gauges, standardized clinical criteria can identify, at presentation, VA ED users who may be safely cared for at a later date in a nonemergency setting. These guidelines apply to a significant proportion of VA ED users with common ambulatory conditions. These criteria deserve testing in other ED settings.

Adult↗
PubMed2000

Selecting target conditions for quality of care improvement in vulnerable older adults.

OBJECTIVE: To identify a set of geriatric conditions as optimal targets for quality improvement to be used in a quality measurement system for vulnerable older adults. DESIGN: Discussion and two rounds of ranking of conditions by a panel of geriatric clinical experts informed by literature reviews. METHODS: A list of 78 conditions common among vulnerable older people was reduced to 35 on the basis of their (1) prevalence, (2) impact on health and quality of life, (3) effectiveness of interventions in improving mortality and quality of life, (4) disparity in the quality of care across providers and geographic areas, and (5) feasibility of obtaining the data needed to test compliance with quality indicators. A panel of 12 experts in geriatric care discussed and then ranked the 35 conditions on the basis of the same five criteria. We then selected 21 conditions, based on panelists' iterative rankings. Using available national data, we compiled information about prevalence of the selected conditions for community-dwelling older people and older nursing home residents and estimated the proportion of inpatient and outpatient care attributable to the selected conditions. RESULTS: The 21 conditions selected as targets for quality improvement among vulnerable older adults include (in rank order): pharmacologic management; depression; dementia; heart failure; stroke (and atrial fibrillation); hospitalization and surgery; falls and mobility disorders; diabetes mellitus; end-of-life care; ischemic heart disease; hypertension; pressure ulcers; osteoporosis; urinary incontinence; pain management; preventive services; hearing impairment; pneumonia and influenza; vision impairment; malnutrition; and osteoarthritis. The selected conditions had mean rank scores from 1.2 to 3.8, and those excluded from 4.6 to 6.9, on a scale from 1 (highest ranking) to 7 (lowest ranking). Prevalence of the selected conditions ranges from 10 to 50% among community-dwelling older adults and from 25 to 80% in nursing home residents for the six most common selected conditions. The 21 target conditions account for at least 43% of all acute hospital discharges and 33% of physician office visits among persons 65 years of age and older. Actual figures must be higher because several of the selected conditions (e.g., end-of-life care) are not recorded as diagnoses. CONCLUSIONS: Twenty-one conditions were selected as targets for quality improvement in vulnerable older people for use in a quality measurement system. The 21 geriatric conditions selected are highly prevalent in this group and likely account for more than half of the care provided to this group in hospital and ambulatory settings.

Aged↗
PubMed2000

Principles of metaanalysis.

Metaanalysis is a relatively new tool to help make evidence based decisions. This technique involves the systematic examination of available evidence on a given clinical topic, and the summary of that evidence using statistical techniques that pool data from multiple studies to yield a single result. We briefly discuss the principal steps in a metaanalysis: identifying all the studies; assessing the studies for quality; organizing the studies into subgroups; and summarizing the results.

Humans↗
PubMed2000

Are nonspecific practice guidelines potentially harmful? A randomized comparison of the effect of nonspecific versus specific guidelines on physician decision making.

OBJECTIVE: To test the ability of two different clinical practice guideline formats to influence physician ordering of electrodiagnostic tests in low back pain. DATA SOURCES/STUDY DESIGN: Randomized controlled trial of the effect of practice guidelines on self-reported physician test ordering behavior in response to a series of 12 clinical vignettes. Data came from a national random sample of 900 U.S. neurologists, physical medicine physicians, and general internists. INTERVENTION: Two different versions of a practice guideline for the use of electrodiagnostic tests (EDT) were developed by the U.S. Agency for Health Care Policy and Research Low Back Problems Panel. The two guidelines were similar in content but varied in the specificity of their recommendations. DATA COLLECTION: The proportion of clinical vignettes for which EDTs were ordered for appropriate and inappropriate clinical indications in each of three physician groups were randomly assigned to receive vignettes alone, vignettes plus the nonspecific version of the guideline, or vignettes plus the specific version of the guideline. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: The response rate to the survey was 71 percent. The proportion of appropriate vignettes for which EDTs were ordered averaged 77 percent for the no guideline group, 71 percent for the nonspecific guideline group, and 79 percent for the specific guideline group (p = .002). The corresponding values for the number of EDTs ordered for inappropriate vignettes were 32 percent, 32 percent, and 26 percent, respectively (p = .08). Pairwise comparisons showed that physicians receiving the nonspecific guidelines ordered fewer EDTs for appropriate clinical vignettes than did physicians receiving no guidelines (p = .02). Furthermore, compared to physicians receiving nonspecific guidelines, physicians receiving specific guidelines ordered significantly more EDTs for appropriate vignettes (p = .0007) and significantly fewer EDTs for inappropriate vignettes (p = .04). CONCLUSIONS: The clarity and clinical applicability of a guideline may be important attributes that contribute to the effects of practice guidelines.

Decision Making↗
PubMed1999

Systematic review of risk factors for urinary tract infection in adults with spinal cord dysfunction.

Recurrent urinary tract infections (UTIs) occur frequently in persons with neurogenic bladders due to spinal cord dysfunction, resulting in increased morbidity and cost. The authors conducted a systematic review to identify risk factors for UTI using controlled clinical trials, cohort, and cross-sectional studies that assessed risk factors for UTI and included bacteriuria or UTI as an outcome. Twenty-two studies met the inclusion criteria. Quality assessment revealed important methodological deficiencies. Two studies provide evidence supporting increased bladder residual volume as a risk factor. Most of the retrieved studies investigated method of drainage with the consistent finding that persons using intermittent catheterization had fewer infections than those with indwelling catheters. There is conflicting evidence over the value of sterile or "no touch" catheter techniques compared with clean intermittent catheterization. There is insufficient evidence to assess risk due to psychosocial, behavioral, and hygiene factors; sex; level of function; and time since injury.

Adult↗
PubMed1999

The effect of panel membership and feedback on ratings in a two-round Delphi survey: results of a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Past observational studies of the RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method have shown that the composition of panels affects the ratings that are obtained. Panels of mixed physicians make different judgments from panels of single specialty physicians, and physicians who use a procedure are more likely to rate it more highly than those who do not. OBJECTIVES: To determine the effect of using physicians and health care managers within a panel designed to assess quality indicators for primary care and to test the effect of different types of feedback within the panel process. METHOD: A two-round postal Delphi survey of health care managers and family physicians rated 240 potential indicators of quality of primary care in the United Kingdom to determine their face validity. Following round one, equal numbers of managers and physicians were randomly allocated to receive either collective (whole sample) or group-only (own professional group only) feedback, thus, creating four subgroups of two single-specialty panels and two mixed panels. RESULTS: Overall, managers rated the indicators significantly higher than physicians. Second-round scores were moderated by the type of feedback received with those receiving collective feedback influenced by the other professional group. CONCLUSIONS: This paper provides further experimental evidence that consensus panel judgments are influenced both by panel composition and by the type of feedback which is given to participants during the panel process. Careful attention must be given to the methods used to conduct consensus panel studies, and methods need to be described in detail when such studies are reported.

Attitude of Health Personnel↗
PubMed1999

Development of review criteria for assessing the quality of management of stable angina, adult asthma, and non-insulin dependent diabetes mellitus in general practice.

OBJECTIVE: To develop review criteria to assess the quality of care for three major chronic diseases: adult asthma, stable angina, and non-insulin dependent diabetes mellitus. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: Modified panel process based upon the RAND/UCLA (University College of Los Angeles) appropriateness method. Three multiprofessional panels made up of general practitioners, hospital specialists, and practice nurses. RESULTS: The RAND/UCLA appropriateness method of augmenting evidence with expert opinion was used to develop criteria for the care of the three conditions. Of those aspects of care which were rated as necessary by the panels, only 26% (16% asthma, 10% non-insulin dependent diabetes, 40% angina) were subsequently rated by the panels as being based on strong scientific evidence. CONCLUSION: The results show the importance of a systematic approach to combining evidence with expert opinion to develop review criteria for assessing the quality of three chronic diseases in general practice. The evidence base for the criteria was often incomplete, and explicit methods need to be used to combine evidence with expert opinion where evidence is not available.

Adult↗
PubMed1998

Congruence between decisions to initiate chiropractic spinal manipulation for low back pain and appropriateness criteria in North America.

BACKGROUND: Recent U.S. practice guidelines recommend spinal manipulation for some patients with low back pain. If followed, these guidelines are likely to increase the number of persons referred for chiropractic care. Concerns have been raised about the appropriate use of chiropractic care, but systematic data are lacking. OBJECTIVE: To determine the appropriateness of chiropractors' decisions to use spinal manipulation for patients with low back pain. DESIGN: Retrospective review of chiropractic office records against preset criteria for appropriateness that were developed from a systematic review of the literature and a nine-member panel of chiropractic and medical specialists. Appropriateness criteria reflect the expected balance between risk and benefit. SETTING: 131 of 185 (71%) chiropractic offices randomly sampled from sites in the United States and Canada. PATIENTS: 10 randomly selected records of patients presenting with low back pain from each office (1310 patients total). MEASUREMENTS: Sociodemographic data on patients and chiropractors; use of health care services by patients; assessment of the decision to initiate spinal manipulation as appropriate, uncertain, or inappropriate. RESULTS: Of the 1310 patients who sought chiropractic care for low back pain, 1088 (83%) had spinal manipulation. For 859 of these patients (79%), records contained data sufficient to determine whether care was congruent with appropriateness criteria. Care was classified as appropriate in 46% of cases, uncertain in 25% of cases, and inappropriate in 29% of cases. Patients who did not undergo spinal manipulation were less likely to have a presentation judged appropriate and were more likely to have a presentation judged inappropriate than were patients who did undergo spinal manipulation (P = 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: The proportion of chiropractic spinal manipulation judged to be congruent with appropriateness criteria is similar to proportions previously described for medical procedures; thus, the findings provide some reassurance about the appropriate application of chiropractic care. However, more than one quarter of patients were treated for indications that were judged inappropriate. The number of inappropriate decisions to use chiropractic spinal manipulation should be decreased.

Adult↗
PubMed1998

The reproducibility of a method to identify the overuse and underuse of medical procedures.

BACKGROUND: To assess the overuse and underuse of medical procedures, various methods have been developed, but their reproducibility has not been evaluated. This study estimates the reproducibility of one commonly used method. METHODS: We performed a parallel, three-way replication of the RAND-University of California at Los Angeles appropriateness method as applied to two medical procedures, coronary revascularization and hysterectomy. Three nine-member multidisciplinary panels of experts were composed for each procedure by stratified random sampling from a list of experts nominated by the relevant specialty societies. Each panel independently rated the same set of clinical scenarios in terms of the appropriateness of the relevant procedure on a risk-benefit scale ranging from 1 to 9. Final ratings were used to classify the procedure in each scenario as necessary or not necessary (to evaluate underuse) and inappropriate or not inappropriate (to evaluate overuse). Reproducibility was measured by overall agreement and by the kappa statistic. The criteria for underuse and overuse derived from these ratings were then applied to real populations of patients who had undergone coronary revascularization or hysterectomy. RESULTS: The rates of agreement among the three coronary-revascularization panels were 95, 94, and 96 percent for inappropriate-use scenarios and 93, 92, and 92 percent for necessary-use scenarios. Agreement among the three hysterectomy panels was 88, 70, and 74 percent for inappropriate-use scenarios. Scenarios involving necessary use of hysterectomy were not assessed. The three-way kappa statistic to detect overuse was 0.52 for coronary revascularization and 0.51 for hysterectomy. The three-way kappa statistic to detect underuse of coronary revascularization was 0.83. Application of individual panels' criteria to real populations of patients resulted in a 100 percent variation in the proportion of cases classified as inappropriate and a 20 percent variation in the proportion of cases classified as necessary. CONCLUSIONS: The appropriateness method is far from perfect. Appropriateness criteria may be useful in comparing levels of appropriate procedures among populations but should not by themselves be used to direct care for individual patients.

Delphi Technique↗