New Marketplace

A Metrics Moonshot

Article · April 13, 2016

By the time I finished reading “Standardizing Patient Outcomes Measurement,” the New England Journal of Medicine article by Michael Porter, Tom Lee, and Stefan Larsson, I was cheering. The authors point out how a “let a thousand flowers bloom” approach to metrics development has resulted in a glut of process measures in health care and slowed progress toward metrics that reflect real outcomes. They decry the artisanal process by which organizations reinvent the metrics wheel over and over but with enough small differences to render broader comparisons of performance useless.

Our team at Weill Cornell Medicine recently compiled an inventory of the metrics by which we are measured by our four largest commercial payers and for our Medicare ACO. We counted 60 individual measures, with a grand total of 2 that apply across the entire group. All track processes rather than outcomes. There are similarities among the other 58 measures but also nuances that introduce a friction into our operations, to which we must devote significant resources to overcoming.

For example, 18% of the measures relate to management of patients who are diabetic. Every payer agrees on measuring the rate at which our attributed patients have an annual retinal eye exam. But while one payer simply measures whether an annual HbA1C level has been documented, another wants the level to be less than 9%. For one payer it is enough that we document prescribing a 180-day supply of a medication, where for another we need to demonstrate that the patient is taking that medication.

Is there is a business case for this complexity? Possibly, if you take the cynical viewpoint that the entities who administer payment for health care services want to set up providers to fail. I don’t believe that’s true — but the quantity of process measures is a real impediment in the quest for value in health care. Payers with a stated goal of improving quality are actively inhibiting progress toward more meaningful outcome measures.

If this patchwork quilt of process measures is the result of a focus on perfection — by specialty societies that choose measures they can control — then let me beg for imperfect uniformity instead. Variability has been linked to poorer outcomes in health care; surely we should apply the same lens to the metrics we use to measure those outcomes.

We’ve heard much recently about moonshots in medicine. This is a call for a metrics moonshot. The International Consortium for Health Outcomes Measurement, which seeks to identify and propagate well validated measures, is a great launching pad. But the planet on which health care needs to land is one where providers, payers and, most importantly, patients, define shared goals for health and measure efforts on how close we all are to achieving those goals. If all parties can devote the time and space to agree on the measures that matter, then health care’s complexity and cost will be reduced. Process measures are the pre-launch equipment checks that ensure our ship will function. Outcomes measures are what will make that giant step forward.

Meaningful outcomes measures will be out of reach as long as we expend our collective energies on reporting processes. Reducing the complexity of that reporting might just be the catalyst that practicing physicians need in order to focus on patient health.

New call for submissions ­to NEJM Catalyst

Now inviting longform articles

Connect

A weekly email newsletter featuring the latest actionable ideas and practical innovations from NEJM Catalyst.

Learn More »

More From New Marketplace
Figure 1. Differential Changes in Total Medicare Spending for Patients in Accountable Care Organizations (ACOs), According to the Type of ACO, Year of Entry, and Number of Years of Participation.

Medicare Spending after 3 Years of the Medicare Shared Savings Program

After 3 years of the MSSP, participation in shared-savings contracts by physician groups was associated with savings for Medicare that grew over the study period, whereas hospital-integrated ACOs did not produce savings (on average) during the same period.

Reason and Potential Cost Changes for Patients with Treament Recommendation Changes During MD Anderson Cancer Center Multidisciplinary Team Meetings

Great Minds Don’t Always Think Alike

How multidisciplinary team meetings improve cancer care.

Mechanic02_pullquote self-insured employers

Self-Insured Employers — The Payment-Reform Wild Card

Without more private-sector leadership, U.S. health care will remain stuck in a fee-for-service system for the foreseeable future.

Washington State Health Care Authority Center of Excellence joint replacement elements and outcomes of program produces strong patient experience scores

Improving Care by Redesigning Payment

A state-run center of excellence uses benefit design to improve outcomes while controlling cost.

Alaigh03_pullquote aco and bundled payment co-exist

ACOs and Bundled Payments: How the Two Can and Should Coexist

The integration of primary care and specialty care physicians through adoption of both payment models will lead to synergistic value.

Pham03_pullquote payment and delivery-system reform

Payment and Delivery-System Reform — The Next Phase

To truly redesign a system, one has to take a holistic approach and move multiple levers in concert, rather than fiddling with individual factors serially and hoping for a coordinated effect.

A Connected Health Data and Service Ecoystem - digital health platform convener

Convening a Digitally Enabled Ecosystem to Address the Chronic Disease Burden of an Underserved Community

Disrupted by technologies, health care needs ecosystem-based solutions for integration and equitable access.

Shachar01_pullquote value-based care fee-for-service fraud and abuse laws

Are Fraud and Abuse Laws Stifling Value-Based Care?

To realize the true potential of value-based care, we must update the underlying assumptions in our fraud and abuse regulatory system.

Porter02_SBUs and IPUs pullquote1

What 21st Century Health Care Should Learn from 20th Century Business

Just as there is no such thing as good marketing or good manufacturing, there is no such thing as good primary care — it completely depends on how that care is tailored to meet the needs of patients with a particular medical condition.

Missouri Show Me Health Plans Cost Calculator for Health Insurance Enrollment screen shot - health insurance education

Facilitating Health Insurance Enrollment in an Uncertain Environment

Lessons learned from five years of open enrollment in Missouri.

Connect

A weekly email newsletter featuring the latest actionable ideas and practical innovations from NEJM Catalyst.

Learn More »

Topics

Payment and Delivery-System Reform — The…

To truly redesign a system, one has to take a holistic approach and move multiple…

Bundled Payments

54 Articles

Great Minds Don’t Always Think Alike

How multidisciplinary team meetings improve cancer care.

Improving Care by Redesigning Payment

A state-run center of excellence uses benefit design to improve outcomes while controlling cost.

Insights Council

Have a voice. Join other health care leaders effecting change, shaping tomorrow.

Apply Now