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 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 Loeb, J. M.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Loeb, J. M.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

International Journal for Quality in Health Care 16:i5-i9 (2004)
International Journal for Quality in Health Care vol. 16 Supplement 1 © International Society for Quality in Health Care and Oxford University Press 2004; all rights reserved

The current state of performance measurement in health care

Jerod M. Loeb

Division of Research, Joint Commission on Accreditation of Healthcare Organizations, Oakbrook Terrace, IL, USA

Health care quality measurement is at least 250 years old. While the names and faces of the measures and measurees have changed, the intent of such measurement, i.e. obtaining data and information bearing clinical outcomes, has not changed over the years, and nor have the challenges associated with the measurement of quality in health care.

Measurement is not a neutral activity. It evokes considerable anxiety and frustration among all concerned: those who are being measured, those who are doing the measuring, and those who are seeking the data for a variety of purposes. There is little agreement on the philosophy of measurement, on what to measure, on whether or how to adjust for what the patient brings to the clinical encounter, on how data should be analyzed, or on how to report the data; and of course the ultimate questions relate to the value of measurement. Measurement adds new costs to the health care delivery system.

Tangible improvements in care, directly attributable to ­performance measurement, are repeatedly being documented. However, the jury has not yet returned a verdict on whether performance measurement data are being used by stakeholders for better decision-making.

Keywords: measurement, performance measurement, quality

Address reprint requests to J. M. Loeb, Division of Research, Joint Commission on Accreditation of Healthcare Organizations, 1 Renaissance Boulevard, Oakbrook Terrace, IL 60181, USA. E-mail: jloeb{at}jcaho.org

Accepted for publication September 24, 2003.


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


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Int J Qual Health CareHome page
E. T. kelley, I. Arispe, and J. Holmes
Beyond the initial indicators: lessons from the OECD Health Care Quality Indicators Project and the US National Healthcare Quality Report
Int. J. Qual. Health Care, September 1, 2006; 18(suppl_1): 45 - 51.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


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.