Practice improvement requires more than guidelines and quality measures.

Abstract

Increasing emphasis on improving health care quality has led to a variety of programs that require neurologists to be familiar with the concept of systematic quality improvement. While they vary in extent, these quality improvement programs and their attendant costs now have implications for physician payment and certification. In response to these factors, the American Academy of Neurology is establishing a clinical quality data registry. This article reviews evidence demonstrating the ability of quality improvement initiatives to improve care, the role of clinical quality data registries in the identification and mitigation of gaps in care, and the principles to be considered in development of registry-based quality improvement programs. It addresses the key question: Is the effort worthwhile?