The quality reporting reality at a large Academic Medical Center: Reporting 1600 unique measures to 49 different sources

Abstract

Objective: This paper explores the complexity and costs associated with quality reporting at a large, tertiary Academic Medical Center (AMC). Methods: For each quality measure reported during fiscal year (FY) 2014, we noted the associated agency or registry and any repeated use of identical measures (measure overlap). In addition, the cost of quality reporting was examined – including personnel, registry expenses, and rewards and penalties. Results: The AMC reported over 1600 unique measures to 49 different sources; measure overlap was 9%. This effort cost $2,367,168, including 24.8 full-time equivalent employees hired specifically to conduct or support quality reporting. Pay-for-performance rewards and penalties totaled $29,197. As a result, $2,337,971 was the FY 2014 cost of quality reporting. Conclusions: There are financial and personnel burdens associated with quality reporting and considerable inefficiencies. As the number of metrics increase, measures need to be carefully assessed, standardized across agencies, and incorporated into electronic health records. The following core competencies are addressed in this article: Systems-based practice, Practice-based learning and improvement.