Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
SpringerLink
Log in

Achieving Success in Quality Reporting

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Quality Spine Care

  • 738 Accesses

Abstract

The focus on value-based healthcare has increased with the escalating cost associated with delivery of care. Regulatory and reimbursement pressures have been established to highlight this new emphasis without the objective process needed to make such determinations. This chapter discusses the role of clinical registries in this process and the efforts made by the organized neurosurgery community to meet this standard. The Quality Outcomes Database (QOD), formerly known as the National Neurosurgery Quality and Outcomes Database (N2QOD), was established and has become the largest cooperative spine registry in North America. The key components of inception and execution are discussed along with key publications utilizing established registry data.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 109.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 139.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 139.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. McCauley JL. Guidelines and value-based decision making: an evolving role for payers. N C Med J [Internet]. 2015 [cited 2015 Dec 19];76:243–6. Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26509518.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Keswani A, Uhler LM, Bozic KJ. What quality metrics is my hospital being evaluated on and what are the consequences? J Arthroplasty [Internet]. 2016 [cited 2016 May 6]; Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27101770.

  3. Mitchell PH, Lang NM. Framing the problem of measuring and improving healthcare quality. Med Care [Internet]. 2004 [cited 2018 Jan 3];42:II-4-II-11. Available from: http://content.wkhealth.com/linkback/openurl?sid=WKPTLP:landingpage&an=00005650-200402001-00002.

  4. Dimick JB, Welch HG, Birkmeyer JD. Surgical mortality as an indicator of hospital quality. JAMA [Internet]. American Medical Association; 2004 [cited 2018 Jan 3];292:847. Available from: http://jama.jamanetwork.com/article.aspx?doi=10.1001/jama.292.7.847.

  5. Physician Clinical Registry Coalition. About – Physician clinical registry coalition [Internet]. [cited 2018 Jan 14]. Available from: http://www.registrycoalition.net/about/.

  6. Neuropoint Alliance. Spine Quality Outcomes Database (SQOD) [Internet]. [cited 2018 Jan 14]. Available from: http://www.neuropoint.org/en/NPA-SQOD/.

  7. AANS. NeuroPoint alliance expands quality outcomes database [Internet]. AANS E-News. 2017 [cited 2018 Jan 14]. Available from: http://www.aans.org/AANS-E-News/November-2017/NeuroPoint-Alliance-Expands-Quality-Outcomes-Database.

  8. Hooff ML van, Jacobs WCH, Willems PC, Wouters MWJM, Kleuver M de, Peul WC, et al. Evidence and practice in spine registries. Acta Orthop [Internet]. 2015 [cited 2018 Jan 14];86:534–44. Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25909475.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Karhade AV, Larsen AMG, Cote DJ, Dubois HM, Smith TR. National databases for neurosurgical outcomes research: options, strengths, and limitations. Neurosurgery [Internet]. 2017 [cited 2018 Jan 14]. Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28950367.

  10. CMS. The Physician Quality Reporting System [Internet]. CMS.gov. 2017 [cited 2018 Jan 14]. Available from: https://www.cms.gov/Medicare/Quality-Initiatives-Patient-Assessment-Instruments/PQRS/index.html?redirect=/pqri.

  11. Swartz KR, Cheng JS. Anticipated changes in spine practice with advancing center for medicare and medicaid services-required changes. Neurosurgery [Internet]. 2017 [cited 2018 Jan 14];80:S28–33. Available from: https://academic.oup.com/neurosurgery/article-lookup/doi/10.1093/neuros/nyw149.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Parker SL, McGirt MJ, Bekelis K, Holland CM, Davies J, Devin CJ, et al. The national neurosurgery quality and outcomes database qualified clinical data registry: 2015 measure specifications and rationale. Neurosurg Focus [Internet]. American Association of Neurological Surgeons; 2015 [cited 2017 Dec 28];39:E4. Available from: http://thejns.org/doi/10.3171/2015.9.FOCUS15355.

  13. CMS. The quality payment program [Internet]. [cited 2018 Jan 14]. Available from: https://qpp.cms.gov/.

  14. Sheehan JP, Kavanagh BD, Asher A, Harbaugh RE. Inception of a national multidisciplinary registry for stereotactic radiosurgery. J Neurosurg [Internet]. 2016 [cited 2018 Jan 14];124:155–62. Available from: http://thejns.org/doi/10.3171/2015.1.JNS142466.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. McGirt MJ, Parker SL, Hilibrand A, Mummaneni P, Glassman SD, Devin CJ, et al. Lumbar surgery in the elderly provides significant health benefit in the US health care system: patient-reported outcomes in 4370 patients from the N2QOD registry. Neurosurgery [Internet]. 2015 [cited 2018 Jan 14];77 Suppl 4:S125–35. Available from: https://academic.oup.com/neurosurgery/article-lookup/doi/10.1227/NEU.0000000000000952.

  16. Whitmore RG, Curran JN, Ali ZS, Mummaneni P V, Shaffrey CI, Heary RF, et al. Predictive value of 3-month lumbar discectomy outcomes in the NeuroPoint-SD registry. J Neurosurg. Spine [Internet]. 2015 [cited 2018 Jan 14];23:459–66. Available from: http://thejns.org/doi/10.3171/2015.1.SPINE14890.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Asher AL, Parker SL, Rolston JD, Selden NR, McGirt MJ. Using clinical registries to improve the quality of neurosurgical care. Neurosurg Clin N Am [Internet]. 2015 [cited 2018 Jan 14];26:253–63. Available from: http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S1042368014001454.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Glassman SD, Carreon LY, Ghogawala Z, Foley KT, McGirt MJ, Asher AL. Benefit of transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion vs posterolateral spinal fusion in lumbar spine disorders. Neurosurgery [Internet]. 2016 [cited 2018 Jan 14];79:397–405. Available from: https://academic.oup.com/neurosurgery/article-lookup/doi/10.1227/NEU.0000000000001118.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Asher AL, McGirt MJ, Ghogawala Z. Introduction: defining, measuring, and predicting quality in neurosurgery. Neurosurg Focus [Internet]. 2015 [cited 2018 Jan 14];39:E1. Available from: http://thejns.org/doi/10.3171/2015.9.FOCUS15502.

  20. Bekelis K, McGirt MJ, Parker SL, Holland CM, Davies J, Devin CJ, et al. The present and future of quality measures and public reporting in neurosurgery. Neurosurg Focus [Internet]. 2015 [cited 2018 Jan 14];39:E3. Available from: http://thejns.org/doi/10.3171/2015.8.FOCUS15354.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Menger RP, Guthikonda B, Storey CM, Nanda A, McGirt M, Asher A. Neurosurgery value and quality in the context of the Affordable Care Act: a policy perspective. Neurosurg Focus [Internet]. 2015 [cited 2018 Jan 14];39:E5. Available from: http://thejns.org/doi/10.3171/2015.9.FOCUS15376.

  22. Chotai S, Parker SL, Sivaganesan A, Sielatycki JA, Asher AL, McGirt MJ, et al. Effect of complications within 90 days on patient-reported outcomes 3 months and 12 months following elective surgery for lumbar degenerative disease. Neurosurg Focus [Internet]. 2015 [cited 2018 Jan 14];39:E8. Available from: http://thejns.org/doi/10.3171/2015.8.FOCUS15302.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. McGirt MJ, Godil SS, Asher AL, Parker SL, Devin CJ. Quality analysis of anterior cervical discectomy and fusion in the outpatient versus inpatient setting: analysis of 7288 patients from the NSQIP database. Neurosurg Focus [Internet]. 2015 [cited 2018 Jan 14];39:E9. Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26621423.

  24. Parker SL, Asher AL, Godil SS, Devin CJ, McGirt MJ. Patient-reported outcomes 3 months after spine surgery: is it an accurate predictor of 12-month outcome in real-world registry platforms? Neurosurg Focus [Internet]. 2015 [cited 2016 May 12];39:E17. Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26621415.

  25. McGirt MJ, Sivaganesan A, Asher AL, Devin CJ. Prediction model for outcome after low-back surgery: individualized likelihood of complication, hospital readmission, return to work, and 12-month improvement in functional disability. Neurosurg Focus [Internet]. 2015 [cited 2018 Jan 15];39:E13. Available from: http://thejns.org/doi/10.3171/2015.8.FOCUS15338.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Adamson T, Godil SS, Mehrlich M, Mendenhall S, Asher AL, McGirt MJ. Anterior cervical discectomy and fusion in the outpatient ambulatory surgery setting compared with the inpatient hospital setting: analysis of 1000 consecutive cases. J Neurosurg Spine [Internet]. 2016 [cited 2018 Jan 14];24:878–84. Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26849708.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Carreon LY, Glassman SD, Ghogawala Z, Mummaneni P V, McGirt MJ, Asher AL. Modeled cost-effectiveness of transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion compared with posterolateral fusion for spondylolisthesis using N(2)QOD data. J Neurosurg Spine [Internet]. 2016 [cited 2018 Jan 14];24:916–21. Available from: http://thejns.org/doi/10.3171/2015.10.SPINE15917.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Asher AL, Chotai S, Devin CJ, Speroff T, Harrell FE, Nian H, et al. Inadequacy of 3-month Oswestry Disability Index outcome for assessing individual longer-term patient experience after lumbar spine surgery. J Neurosurg Spine [Internet]. 2016 [cited 2018 Jan 14];25:170–80. Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26989974.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. McGirt MJ, Parker SL, Chotai S, Pfortmiller D, Sorenson JM, Foley K, et al. Predictors of extended length of stay, discharge to inpatient rehab, and hospital readmission following elective lumbar spine surgery: introduction of the Carolina-Semmes Grading Scale. J Neurosurg Spine [Internet]. 2017 [cited 2018 Jan 14];27:382–90. Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28498068.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. McGirt MJ, Bydon M, Archer KR, Devin CJ, Chotai S, Parker SL, et al. An analysis from the Quality Outcomes Database, Part 1. Disability, quality of life, and pain outcomes following lumbar spine surgery: predicting likely individual patient outcomes for shared decision-making. J Neurosurg Spine [Internet]. 2017 [cited 2018 Jan 14];27:357–69. Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28498074.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Asher AL, Devin CJ, Archer KR, Chotai S, Parker SL, Bydon M, et al. An analysis from the Quality Outcomes Database, Part 2. Predictive model for return to work after elective surgery for lumbar degenerative disease. J Neurosurg Spine [Internet]. 2017 [cited 2018 Jan 14];27:370–81. Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28498069.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Asher AL, Kerezoudis P, Mummaneni P V, Bisson EF, Glassman SD, Foley KT, et al. Defining the minimum clinically important difference for grade I degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis: insights from the Quality Outcomes Database. Neurosurg Focus [Internet]. 2018 [cited 2018 Jan 14];44:E2. Available from: http://thejns.org/doi/10.3171/2017.10.FOCUS17554.

  33. Chan AK, Bisson EF, Bydon M, Glassman SD, Foley KT, Potts EA, et al. Women fare best following surgery for degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis: a comparison of the most and least satisfied patients utilizing data from the Quality Outcomes Database. Neurosurg Focus [Internet]. 2018 [cited 2018 Jan 14];44:E3. Available from: http://thejns.org/doi/10.3171/2017.10.FOCUS17553.

  34. Dixon-Woods M, Pronovost PJ. Patient safety and the problem of many hands. BMJ Qual Saf [Internet]. BMJ Publishing Group Ltd; 2016 [cited 2018 Jan 15];25:485–8. Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26912578.

  35. Classen DC, Resar R, Griffin F, Federico F, Frankel T, Kimmel N, et al. “Global trigger tool” shows that adverse events in hospitals may be ten times greater than previously measured. Health Aff [Internet]. 2011 [cited 2018 Jan 15];30:581–9. Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21471476.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Makary MA, Daniel M. Medical error – the third leading cause of death in the US. BMJ [Internet]. 2016 [cited 2016 May 4];353:i2139. Available from: http://www.bmj.com/content/353/bmj.i2139.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Neurosurgery, Penn State University, Milton S. Hershey Medical Center, Hershey, PA, USA

    Brian L. Anderson, Pratik Rohatgi & Robert E. Harbaugh

Authors
  1. Brian L. Anderson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Pratik Rohatgi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Robert E. Harbaugh
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Robert E. Harbaugh .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Neurosurgery, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA

    John Ratliff

  2. Hospital for Special Surgery, New York, NY, USA

    Todd J. Albert

  3. University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, OH, USA

    Joseph Cheng

  4. Atlantic Neurosurgical Specialists, Morristown, NJ, USA

    Jack Knightly

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Anderson, B.L., Rohatgi, P., Harbaugh, R.E. (2019). Achieving Success in Quality Reporting. In: Ratliff, J., Albert, T., Cheng, J., Knightly, J. (eds) Quality Spine Care. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-97990-8_24

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-97990-8_24

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-97989-2

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-97990-8

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation