Primary Care Docs Track Average of 57 (!) Quality Measures

A new JAMA Health Forum analysis suggests one reason doctors are wary of value-based care arrangements: Overkill.
Researchers found that primary care physicians in one large integrated health system were required to track an average of 57 different quality measures across multiple insurers that linked outcomes to payments under value-based contracts.
Medicare contracts were the most likely to pile quality measures on physicians with an average of 13.42 measures vs 10.07 for commercial insurer contracts and 5.37 for Medicaid contracts, reported Claire Boone, PhD, of the University of Chicago, Chicago, and Providence Research Network, Portland, Oregon, and colleagues in JAMA Health Forum. The analysis, which may be the first of its kind, tracked 890 primary care physicians from 2020 to 2022.
The average of 57 quality measures per physician was unexpectedly high, Boone told Medscape Medical News.
“The magnitude of that number surprised us,” Boon said. “Primary care physicians and their practices have a lot on their plate. Now we know that one of those things is a very large number of different quality metrics to pay attention to, measure, report on, and implement.
Value-based care programs use quality measures to evaluate how well clinicians are doing their jobs and adjust reimbursement accordingly. A payer, for example, may raise reimbursements if a clinician has higher numbers of patients who meet quality measure standards for depression screening or blood pressure.
Boone said her research group is studying the impact of quality measures and was surprised that data showed individual primary care physicians had to deal with a high number of value-based contracts.
The researchers tracked value-based contracts for 890 physicians (58.3% women, 41.7% men) in an unidentified West Coast Health system. (Several study authors work for the Providence Health System, which serves several Western States and Texas.) The average number of patients per physician was 1309.
The physicians were part of an average of 11.18 value-based contracts (commercial insurers = 49.50%, Medicaid = 21.49%, and Medicare = 29.01%). This number grew from 9.39 in 2020 to 12.26 in 2022. Quality measure data weren’t available for 29% of contracts.
Quality measures were considered unique if they referenced different conditions.
For example, colorectal cancer screening is unique from depression screening. The researchers also considered measures for the same condition unique if the target value differed — for example, blood pressure control defined as < 140/90 vs blood pressure control defined as < 130/80, Boone said.
Boone said she expected payers to coordinate quality measures.
“The fact that they largely are not is really the main finding of this paper. Without coordination, the use of value-based contracts and quality measures at scale leads to many unique measures being used. This may reflect the fact that there are so many important tasks to do in primary care, and there’s no consensus on which ones should be included in quality-based contracts.”
Ronald N. Adler, MD, an associate professor in the Department of Family Medicine and Community Health at UMass Chan Medical School, Worcester, Massachusetts, who’s familiar with the findings but didn’t take part in the research, said the study offers something new — the quantification of quality measures.
He told Medscape Medical News that physicians deal with quality measures in different ways. Some clinicians “don’t really care,” he said, and have an attitude of “this is not why I got into medicine.” But others “are very competitive around this, and it leads to a lot of a lot of stress. Trying to address 50-plus measures is impossible and demoralizing.”
The metrics may measure things like mammogram screening that are out of the physician’s control, Adler said. “I can recommend a mammogram, and my patient can choose not to do it. Or maybe my patient is homeless; she doesn’t have transportation, and it’s not a priority for her, even though she wants to do it.”
Patients may not take medication as prescribed, or they may be unable to afford it, he said. “Can they afford to eat healthy foods? Or is ramen all they can afford, and their sugars are through the roof? There are a lot of factors at play here that are independent of the quality of care provided by the doctor.”
As for his own approach, Adler said he worries about some measures more than others. “I’m very proactive about screening my patients for colon cancer and maybe a little less so about mammography.”
For colon cancer screening, “there are a lot of benefits and not that many harms as opposed to mammography, which has harms such as false positives and overdiagnosis of breast cancer.”
Adler is a member of the Quality Measure Alignment Taskforce in Massachusetts, which is trying to establish consensus on appropriate quality measures. But payer participation is voluntary. “Our health systems are too siloed…so there is no readily available mechanism for enforcing such recommendations.”
Wayne Altman, MD, chair of Family Medicine at Tufts University School of Medicine, Boston, is also familiar with the study findings but didn’t take part in the research. He told Medscape Medical News that clinicians shouldn’t have to deal with more than 5-10 quality measures in total.
He pointed out that many measures don’t make sense in certain populations. Titrating blood pressure to < 140/90 isn’t ideal for elderly patients because aggressive control can send their blood pressure dangerously low. “They’re going to fall down, break a hip, and likely die within a year. You have to have the right population and be aware of unintended consequences.”
Still, Adler noted, there’s an important role for quality measures in healthcare.
“We need data to inform our quality improvement activities, but they need to be the right measures. People can’t respond reasonably to improve on 50-plus measures,” he said. “They need to be consolidated and prioritized. It would be really helpful if we could have a much lower number of measures that are meaningful, safe, and connect to things that matter.”
No funding has been reported. Boone disclosed a grant from the National Institute on Aging. Adler and Altman had no disclosures.
Randy Dotinga is an independent journalist and board member of the Association of Health Care Journalists.
 
Send comments and news tips to [email protected].