Items in cart [0] Questions? Call 888-624-8373

Rights & Permissions Free PDF Access Free Resources Sign in to download PDF book and chapters Display this book on your site! Related Titles From Cancer Patient to Cancer Survivor: Lost in Transition Performance Measurement: Accelerating Improvement (Pathways to Quality Health Care Series) Other Related Titles Interpreting the Volume-Outcome Relationship in the Context of Health Care Quality: Workshop Summary (2000) Institute of Medicine (IOM) Web Search Builder Use this book's key terms to search within this book, across our collection, or across the Web. Skim This Chapter Skim this chapter and use this chapter's key terms to search within this book. Reference Finder Paste in your own text to find books that relate to your topic. Page 19   E-mail  Facebook  Digg  Stumble  Twitter More The following HTML text is provided to enhance online readability. Many aspects of typography translate only awkwardly to HTML. Please use the page image as the authoritative form to ensure accuracy. APPENDIX A Workshop Agenda INSTITUTE OF MEDICINE Division of Health Care Services, Committee on Quality in Health Care in America National Cancer Policy Board May 11, 2000 OBJECTIVES Review evidence of the relationship between volume of services and health-related outcomes. Discuss methodological issues related to the interpretation of the association between volume and outcome. Assess the applicability of volume as an indicator of quality of care. Identify research needed to better understand the volume-outcome relationship and its application to quality improvement. AGENDA 9:00 a.m.–9:30 a.m. Welcome and introduction: Diana Petitti Opening remarks: John Eisenberg   Session 1 9:30 a.m.–12:15 p.m. Overview of the Volume-Outcome Relationship Opening remarks: Mark Chassin 9:30 a.m.–10:30 a.m. Presentation of background paper: “Synthesis of Evidence from the Literature,” Ethan Halm 10:30 a.m.–10:45 a.m. Coffee break 10:45 a.m.–12:15 p.m. Roundtable discussion Moderators: Mark Chassin and Jane Sisk Is the association consistent across conditions/procedures/services? What factors might explain the association? Page 19 Front Matter (R1-R6) Contents (R7-R8) Abstract (1-1) Introduction (1-2) Why Does the Volume-Outcome Relationship Matter? Who Cares and How Could it Be Used? (3-3) How is Volume Related to Quality in Health Care? (4-9) What Are the Policy Implications of a Volume-Outcome Relationship? (10-16) Where Do We Go From Here? (17-18) Appendix A: Workshop Agenda and Participants (19-22) Appendix B: Members of the Committee on Quality of Health Care in America and the National Cancer Policy Board (23-26) Appendix C: How is Volume Related to Quality in Health Care? A Systematic Review of the Research Literature? (27-102) Appendix D: When and How Should Purchasers Seek to Selectively Refer Patients to High-Quality Hospitals? (103-119)

Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.

OCR for page 19
Interpreting the Volume–Outcome Relationship in the Context of Health Care Quality: Workshop Summary APPENDIX A Workshop Agenda INSTITUTE OF MEDICINE Division of Health Care Services, Committee on Quality in Health Care in America National Cancer Policy Board May 11, 2000 OBJECTIVES Review evidence of the relationship between volume of services and health-related outcomes. Discuss methodological issues related to the interpretation of the association between volume and outcome. Assess the applicability of volume as an indicator of quality of care. Identify research needed to better understand the volume-outcome relationship and its application to quality improvement. AGENDA 9:00 a.m.–9:30 a.m. Welcome and introduction: Diana Petitti Opening remarks: John Eisenberg   Session 1 9:30 a.m.–12:15 p.m. Overview of the Volume-Outcome Relationship Opening remarks: Mark Chassin 9:30 a.m.–10:30 a.m. Presentation of background paper: “Synthesis of Evidence from the Literature,” Ethan Halm 10:30 a.m.–10:45 a.m. Coffee break 10:45 a.m.–12:15 p.m. Roundtable discussion Moderators: Mark Chassin and Jane Sisk Is the association consistent across conditions/procedures/services? What factors might explain the association?

OCR for page 20
Interpreting the Volume–Outcome Relationship in the Context of Health Care Quality: Workshop Summary   What measurement issues need to be addressed (e.g., defining volume, thresholds/cutpoints, units of analysis)? Does the evidence support applying volume as a quality-of-care measure? What additional research is needed?   Reactors/discussants: Edward Hannan, Norman Hertzer, Colin Begg, Bruce Hillner, Arnold Milstein 12:15 p.m.–l:15 p.m. Lunch   Session 2 1:15 p.m.–3:30 p.m. Policy implications Opening remarks: Diana Pettiti 1:15 p.m.–l :45 p.m. Presentation of background paper—“When and How Could Volume Be Used as an Indicator of Quality Care? ” Adams Dudley 1:45 p.m.–3:30 p.m. Roundtable discussion Moderators: Don Berwick and Robert Galvin What level of evidence is needed to support policies? What are the strengths and weaknesses of alternative implementation strategies? What are the potential barriers to applying volume as an indicator of quality (e.g., access in rural areas, patient preferences for care close to home) What policy-relevant health services research is needed? Reactors/discussants: Consumer perspectives: Art Levin and Ellen Stovall Purchaser perspectives: Bruce Bradley, Steven Clauser, and Irene Fraser Managed care: George Isham and Sam Ho Provider groups: Don Nielsen   Session 3 3:30 p.m.–4:00 p.m. Where do we go from here? Moderator: Joseph Simone   Wrap-up: Discussion of findings and research needs 4:00 p.m. Workshop Adjourns

OCR for page 21
Interpreting the Volume–Outcome Relationship in the Context of Health Care Quality: Workshop Summary PARTICIPANTS Colin Begg Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center New York, NY Donald M. Berwick Institute for Healthcare Improvement Boston, MA Richard Bae University of California San Francisco, CA Bruce Bradley General Motors Detroit, MI Mark R. Chassin The Mount Sinai School of Medicine New York, NY Steven Clauser Health Care Financing Administration Baltimore, MD Jan De la Mare Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality Rockville, MD Suzanne DelBanco The Leapfrog Group Washington, DC R. Adams Dudley UC San Francisco San Francisco, CA John Eisenberg Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality Rockville, MD Irene Fraser Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality Rockville, MD Robert Galvin General Electric Company Fairfield, CT Ethan Halm The Mount Sinai School of Medicine New York, NY Edward Hannan State University of New York at Albany Rensselaer NY Norman Hertzer Cleveland Clinic Cleveland, OH Bruce Hillner Virginia Commonwealth University Richmond, VA Sam Ho Pacificare Health Systems Santa Anna, CA George J. Isham HealthPartners Bloomington, MN Clara Lee The Mount Sinai School of Medicine New York, NY Arthur Levin Center for Medical Consumers New York, NY Arnold Milstein William M. Mercer, Inc San Francisco, CA Peggy McNamara Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality Rockville, MD

OCR for page 22
Interpreting the Volume–Outcome Relationship in the Context of Health Care Quality: Workshop Summary Don Nielsen American Hospital Association Chicago, IL Diana Petitti Kaiser Permanente of Southern California Pasadena, CA Joseph Simone Huntsman Cancer Foundation and Institute Salt Lake City, UT Jane Sisk Mount Sinai School of Medicine New York, NY Ellen Stovall National Coalition for Cancer Survivorship Silver Spring, MD IOM and NCPB Staff Janet M. Corrigan, Program Director, IOM Maria Hewitt, Senior Program Officer, NCPB Ellen Johnson, Administrative Assistant, NCPB Kelly C. Pike, Senior Project Assistant, IOM

Representative terms from entire chapter:

diana petitti