Skip Navigation

This Article
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Weingart, S. N.
Right arrow Articles by Iezzoni, L. I.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Weingart, S. N.
Right arrow Articles by Iezzoni, L. I.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

International Journal for Quality in Health Care 13:357-365 (2001)
© 2001 International Society for Quality in Health Care

Physician-reviewers' perceptions and judgments about quality of care

Saul N. Weingart, Kenneth Mukamal, Roger B. Davis, Donald T. Davies, Jr, R. Heather Palmer, Michael Cahalane, Mary Beth Hamel, Russell S. Phillips and Lisa I. Iezzoni

Division of General Medicine and Primary Care, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Department of Medicine, Harvard Medical School, Charles A. Dana Research Institute and the Harvard-Thorndike Library,
Department of Health Policy and Management, Harvard School of Public Health
Department of Surgery, Harvard Medical School and Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston, MA, USA

Objective. Although Peer Review Organizations (PROs) and researchers rely on physicians to assess quality of care, little is known about what physicians think about when they judge quality. We sought to identify features of individual cases that are associated with physicians' judgments.

Design. Using 1994 Medicare data, we selected hospitalizations for 1134 beneficiaries in 42 acute care hospitals in California and Connecticut. The sample was enriched with 17 surgical and six medical complications identified using diagnosis and procedure codes. PRO physicians confirmed quality problems using a structured implicit chart review instrument and provided written open-ended comments about each case. We coded physicians' comments for factors presumed to influence judgments about quality.

Results. In crude and adjusted comparisons, reviewers questioned quality more frequently in cases with serious or fatal outcomes, technical mishaps and inadequate documentation. Among surgical (but not medical) patients, they were less likely to record poor quality among patients presenting with an acute illness.

Conclusion. Factors other than the adequacy of key processes of care are associated with physician-reviewers' judgments about quality.

Keywords: complications, organization, peer review, quality of care


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?




Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.