Interpreting the Volume–Outcome Relationship in the Context of Health Care Quality

Workshop Summary

by

Maria Hewitt

for the Committee on Quality of Health Care in America and the National Cancer Policy Board

INSTITUTE OF MEDICINE
Washington, D.C.



The National Academies | 500 Fifth St. N.W. | Washington, D.C. 20001
Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Terms of Use and Privacy Statement



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 R1
Interpreting the Volume–Outcome Relationship in the Context of Health Care Quality: Workshop Summary Interpreting the Volume–Outcome Relationship in the Context of Health Care Quality Workshop Summary by Maria Hewitt for the Committee on Quality of Health Care in America and the National Cancer Policy Board INSTITUTE OF MEDICINE Washington, D.C.

OCR for page R1
Interpreting the Volume–Outcome Relationship in the Context of Health Care Quality: Workshop Summary INSTITUTE OF MEDICINE 2101 Constitution Avenue, N.W. Washington, DC 20418 NOTICE: The project that is the subject of this report was approved by the Governing Board of the National Research Council, whose members are drawn from the councils of the National Academy of Sciences, the National Academy of Engineering, and the Institute of Medicine. The members of the committee responsible for the report were chosen for their special competences and with regard for appropriate balance. Support for this project was provided by The Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. Additional copies of this report are available in limited quantities from the National Cancer Policy Board, 2101 Constitution Avenue, N.W., Washington, DC 20418. The full text of this report is available at www.nap.edu. For more information about the Institute of Medicine, visit the IOM home page at www.iom.edu. Copyright 2000 by the National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved. Printed in the United States of America. The serpent has been a symbol of long life, healing, and knowledge among almost all cultures and religions since the beginning of recorded history. The serpent adopted as a logotype by the Institute of Medicine is a relief carving from ancient Greece, now held by the Staatliche Museen in Berlin.

OCR for page R1
Interpreting the Volume–Outcome Relationship in the Context of Health Care Quality: Workshop Summary “Knowing is not enough; we must apply. Willing is not enough; we must do.” —Goethe INSTITUTE OF MEDICINE Shaping the Future for Health

OCR for page R1
Interpreting the Volume–Outcome Relationship in the Context of Health Care Quality: Workshop Summary THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES National Academy of Sciences National Academy of Engineering Institute of Medicine National Research Council The National Academy of Sciences is a private, nonprofit, self-perpetuating society of distinguished scholars engaged in scientific and engineering research, dedicated to the furtherance of science and technology and to their use for the general welfare. Upon the authority of the charter granted to it by the Congress in 1863, the Academy has a mandate that requires it to advise the federal government on scientific and technical matters. Dr. Bruce M. Alberts is president of the National Academy of Sciences. The National Academy of Engineering was established in 1964, under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences, as a parallel organization of outstanding engineers. It is autonomous in its administration and in the selection of its members, sharing with the National Academy of Sciences the responsibility for advising the federal government. The National Academy of Engineering also sponsors engineering programs aimed at meeting national needs, encourages education and research, and recognizes the superior achievements of engineers. Dr. William A. Wulf is president of the National Academy of Engineering. The Institute of Medicine was established in 1970 by the National Academy of Sciences to secure the services of eminent members of appropriate professions in the examination of policy matters pertaining to the health of the public. The Institute acts under the responsibility given to the National Academy of Sciences by its congressional charter to be an adviser to the federal government and, upon its own initiative, to identify issues of medical care, research, and education. Dr. Kenneth I. Shine is president of the Institute of Medicine. The National Research Council was organized by the National Academy of Sciences in 1916 to associate the broad community of science and technology with the Academy's purposes of furthering knowledge and advising the federal government. Functioning in accordance with general policies determined by the Academy, the Council has become the principal operating agency of both the National Academy of Sciences and the National Academy of Engineering in providing services to the government, the public, and the scientific and engineering communities. The Council is administered jointly by both Academies and the Institute of Medicine. Dr. Bruce M. Alberts and Dr. William A. Wulf are chairman and vice chairman, respectively, of the National Research Council.

OCR for page R1
Interpreting the Volume–Outcome Relationship in the Context of Health Care Quality: Workshop Summary REVIEWERS This report has been reviewed in draft form by individuals chosen for their diverse perspectives and technical expertise, in accordance with procedures approved by the NRC's Report Review Committee. The purpose of this independent review is to provide candid and critical comments that will assist the institution in making its published report as sound as possible and to ensure that the report meets institutional standards for objectivity, evidence, and responsiveness to the study charge. The review comments and draft manuscript remain confidential to protect the integrity of the deliberative process. We wish to thank the following individuals for their review of this report: Bruce E. Bradley, General Motors Corp., Detroit, Michigan John S. Chipman, Ph.D., Department of Economics, University of Minnesota Judith H. Hibbard, Dr.P.H., Department of Planning, Public Policy, and Management, University of Oregon David Nerenz, Ph.D., Director, Health Care Studies, Institute for Managed Care, Michigan State University Donald Nielsen, M.D., American Hospital Association, Chicago Kathryn A. Phillips, Ph.D., Associate Professor of Health Economics, School of Pharmacy, Institute for Health Policy Studies, University of California at San Francisco Although the reviewers listed above have provided many constructive comments and suggestions, they were not asked to endorse the conclusions or recommendations nor did they see the final draft of the report before its release. The review of this report was overseen by Sheldon Greenfield, Ph.D., Director, The Primary Care Outcomes Research Institute, New England Medical Center Hospitals, Boston, appointed by the Institute of Medicine, who was responsible for making certain that an independent examination of this report was carried out in accordance with institutional procedures and that all review comments were carefully considered. Responsibility for the final content of this report rests entirely with the authoring committee and the institution.

OCR for page R1
Interpreting the Volume–Outcome Relationship in the Context of Health Care Quality: Workshop Summary This page in the original is blank.