[Skip to Content]
Access to paid content on this site is currently suspended due to excessive activity being detected from your IP address 54.163.129.96. Please contact the publisher to request reinstatement.
[Skip to Content Landing]
Viewpoint
January 12, 2016

Creating Safe Harbors for Quality Measurement Innovation and Improvement

Author Affiliations
  • 1Kaiser Permanente Center for Effectiveness & Safety Research, Pasadena, California
  • 2Department of Veterans Affairs Center for Clinical Management Research, Ann Arbor, Michigan
  • 3University of Michigan Department of Internal Medicine and Institute for Healthcare Policy and Innovation, Ann Arbor
JAMA. 2016;315(2):129-130. doi:10.1001/jama.2015.16858

Public reporting on quality performance has become widespread, and financial rewards for demonstrating higher quality are now common. National organizations, such as the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), the National Committee for Quality Assurance (NCQA), and The Joint Commission, as well as some employers, large health care systems, and multistakeholder collations, operate programs that track, and sometimes pay for, quality using a defined set of measures. Although there is evidence that measurement and reporting have contributed to improved quality, there also is evidence that current quality monitoring systems have had unintended consequences and sometimes limited returns.1,2

First Page Preview View Large
First page PDF preview
First page PDF preview
×