Linking commercial claims and state registry data to assess cancer care quality at the medical group level: Early lessons from California.

Abstract

269 Background: The Integrated Healthcare Association (IHA) is a non-profit organization which runs the largest Pay for Performance program in California. We describe a feasibility study to apply NQF cancer quality measures to linked commercial claims and state registry data and calculate results at the physician organization level. We describe phase I of the study: identifying appropriate measures and securing access to the data. Methods: We requested technical specifications for 9 NQF breast and colon cancer quality measures from the measure stewards and 2009 –2012 claims data from 7 California health plans. Results: Two barriers were identified in phase I: First, California Cancer Registry (CCR) data policies, designed for public health surveillance and not quality measurement, caused delays and present hurdles to public reporting. CCR data is not available until it is at least 95% complete, so 2011 data was not available until October 2013. Moreover, CCR requires that they conduct the data linkage, which required new data use agreements between the data aggregator and each participating insurer – costly in both time and legal fees. Finally, obstacles to public reporting any of the CCR data at the provider level still exist. Barrier 2: NQF measure specifications for linked claims-registry data sets do not currently exist, so the project team developed them, adding to the problem of proliferating non-harmonized quality measures. Conclusions: While the application of NQF measures to claims-registry linkage appears feasible for measurement of cancer care quality at the medical group level, registry policies and the lack of standard technical specifications for linked claims-registry data sets adversely impact the timeliness, usability, and comparability of results using two widely available data sources. More flexible policies on the part of data registries and attention to measure harmonization could improve data quality and usability for cancer care quality assessment and public reporting, and should be considered. In phase 2, we will apply the measures at the physician group level, and assess the feasibility of public reporting at the physician group level.