Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter.
Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.
OCR for page 35
Results of the Medicare
Beneficiary and
Physician Focus Groups
Allison I. Walker
In order to design a strategy for quality review and assurance in the
Medicare program, the Institute of Medicine (IOM) study committee judged
it necessary to learn more about definitions, expectations, and concerns
regarding quality of care. To this end, two separate studies were conducted
using a focus group methodology. Although initially only one series of
focus groups was planned- among Medicare beneficiaries-the activity
yielded a wealth of information and generated further interest in this ap-
proach. Because of the need to reach more physicians in private practice
than the original study design and committee structure permitted, it was
decided that a second series of focus groups would be held among practic-
ing physicians. This chapter describes the methods and results of the two
sets of focus groups.
BENEFITS AND LIMITATIONS OF FOCUS GROUPS1
Focus groups are open-ended, but structured, discussions led by a trained
moderator. They provide a practical and useful way to identify issues
relevant to, and concerns about, a given topic. In contrast to other survey
research methods that require the investigators to ask respondents a uniform
set of questions, focus groups can be used to collect information in partici-
pants' own words about how they view, define, understand, or evaluate the
topic under discussion. The focus group methodology was initially devel-
oped by sociologists Robert K. Merton and Patricia L. Kendall over 40
years ago (Merton and Kendall, 1946~. This technique has been advanced
and improved over numerous applications since the original work.
We designed He first set of focus groups to elicit attitudes and concerns
of Medicare beneficiaries in five main areas: (1) personal experience and
35
OCR for page 36
36
ALL lSON ~ . WALKER
satisfaction with health care; (2) views on the concept of quality of medical
care; (3) knowledge of quality assurance activities; (4) desire for informa-
tion; and (5) ideas about how to improve the quality of health care. Simi-
larly, the focus groups among practicing physicians were designed to elicit
attitudes and concerns in six main areas: (1) positive and negative aspects
of caring for elderly patients; (2) views on the concept of quality; (3) the
Medicare program and its effect on quality of care; (4) identification of
quality problems; (5) effectiveness of quality assurance mechanisms; and
(6) ways to improve quality of care.
Although focus groups do not involve "rigorous" survey methods that
permit results to be generalized to an entire population, they add a very
human element that is often absent in more quantitative research. Discus-
sions guided by open-ended questions permit a more in-depth investigation
of salient issues than do rigid survey instruments. Issues and insights can
surface that otherwise might be missed. Focus group research is widely
used and, some have argued, is the most "psychologically valid" form of
opinion research in the United States.
Nonetheless, the limitations to the generalizability of information de-
rived from the focus groups should be understood. First, the sample size of
participants is usually smaller than that which is required for statistical
generalization. Second, regardless of how they are recruited, focus group
participants are not representative of the population; willingness to partici-
pate in focus groups is not randomly distributed throughout the population.
Third, unmeasurable bias can be introduced by differences in question se-
quence and phrasing in each focus group. An important component of
statistical reliability in survey research is the requirement that each respon-
dent will be exposed to the questions in the same order and manner. This
cannot be easily achieved in focus groups.
In the present case, the ideas that focus group participants expressed
about quality in health care provide an understanding of common attitudes
and opinions among Medicare beneficiaries and physicians treating Medi-
care patients. The findings supplement information available to the com-
mittee from the literature and through public hearings and site visits.
STUDY METHODS
Subcontractor Selection
The subcontractor for this activity, Mathew Greenwald and Associates,
Inc., was selected on the basis of several criteria: (1) previous experience
with focus groups involving elderly people; (2) experience with focus groups
on health care issues; (3) experience using focus groups for policy studies;
and (4) proposed budget.
OCR for page 37
MEDICARE BENEFICIARY AND PHYSICIA!J FOCUS GROUPS
37
Mathew Greenwald and Associates arranged for the use of focus group
facilities and audiotaping and transcription for each group. In conjunction
with IOM staff, the company drafted the screening criteria by which partici-
pants were recruited and also prepared the moderator's guide listing the
questions to stimulate the group discussions. Mathew Greenwald and Asso-
ciates supervised the recruitment of participants, and Dr. Greenwald, presi-
dent of the company, moderated all focus groups.
Focus Group Site Selection
Four main criteria guided the selection of sites for each set of focus
groups:
1. The sites had to contain a high concentration of Medicare beneficiar-
ies within a specific geographic region, for ease in recruiting both benefici-
aries and physicians whose Medicare patient population was to be at least
20 percent.
2. Locating facilities and recruiting participants had to be relatively
straightforward, essentially restricting the activity to urban areas.
3. At least two sites for each set of focus groups had to have a high
concentration of health maintenance organizations (HMOs).
4. For the groups among beneficiaries, the four major census regions
had to be represented. For the physician groups, at least two had to be
comprised primarily of rural physicians.
For the beneficiary focus groups, study staff selected New York City;
Miami, Florida; Minneapolis, Minnesota; and San Francisco, California as
the study sites that best met these four criteria. For the focus groups among
practicing physicians, study staff selected Philadelphia, Pennsylvania; New
Orleans, Louisiana; Chicago, Illinois; Los Angeles, California; and Albuquer-
que, New Mexico. All the focus groups except two were conducted at
facilities with which Mathew Greenwald and Associates had had previous
experience. One group in New Orleans was conducted at a hotel in conjunc-
tion with the annual conference of the American Academy of Family Physi-
cians (AAFP), and the group in Albuquerque was conducted at the offices
of the New Mexico State Medical Society, in conjunction with its annual
meeting.2
Development of the Moderator's Guide
For both sets of focus groups, the subcontractor and the study staff jointly
developed the moderator's guides. Different guides were developed for
separate focus groups of fee-for-service beneficiaries, nursing home resi-
dents, and HMO enrollees. (Refer to Appendix A for one example of the
OCR for page 38
38
ALUSON J. WALKER
moderator's guide.) Each guide addressed the same five topics but was
modified as appropriate for the group in question. For the focus groups
among practicing physicians, one moderator's guide was developed to pro-
vide direction on the six topics to be discussed (Appendix B).
The Recruiting Process
Recruiting focus group participants can be done in several ways. Two of
the more common approaches are to use files previously developed by the
research facilities and to use randomized telephone dialing. Each approach
has drawbacks and advantages, including a tradeoff between cost and unbi-
ased selection.
To minimize disadvantages and maximize advantages, we decided to
combine the two approaches to ensure some degree of randomness and to
decrease the bias that might be associated with using only one of the previ-
ously mentioned methods. Thus, in most of the groups, half of the partici-
pants were recruited through the use of facility lists, and half were recruited
from telephone listings selected randomly from telephone directories. Each
research center was responsible for recruiting its own sets of participants
according to these methods.
All participants in the New York City beneficiary focus groups were
recruited exclusively through the use of facility lists because of the high
cost of recruiting through random digit dialing in that city. For the group of
nursing home residents, participants were selected on the basis of ability to
travel and attend the focus group session at a facility outside of the nursing
home. Recruiting for the AAFP physician group was conducted using the
conference pre-registration list and random dialing, and the group in New
Mexico was selected by the Executive Director of the state medical society.
Focus Group Composition
Although it is not realistic to seek representativeness or to estimate popu-
lation parameters using focus groups, we went to some lengths to achieve
diversity. By design, therefore, we obtained elderly participants who brought
with them perspectives that may be affected by age, race, sex, recent health
care experience, and HMO membership, and in the case of physicians, prac-
tice in the fee-for-service or prepaid group practice sector, rural or urban
location, and specialty.
Pre-recruitment Specifications of the Beneficiary Focus Groups
Eight beneficiary focus groups were conducted: two each in New York
City, Miami, Minneapolis, and San Francisco (in that order). The composition
OCR for page 39
MEDICARE BENEFICIARY AND PHYSICIA;N FOCUS GROUPS
39
of the groups was varied by design two groups comprised participants ages
65 to 74; two groups had participants ages 75 and above; and one group was
diverse by age with all participants being at least 65 years old. Most
participants in these five groups obtained their health care largely through
the fee-for-service system. Two other groups (one in Miami and one in
Minneapolis) consisted of only HMO enrollees, both groups being diverse
by age. One group (in Minneapolis) had only nursing home residents.
The recruitment criteria required that each focus group should have as
even a male-female ratio as possible and some ethnic diversity. The groups
in New York City, San Francisco, and Miami were to have at least three
nonwhite or Hispanic participants; the groups in Minneapolis were to have
at least one nonwhite or Hispanic member. Finally, each group was to have
at least four people with recent "acute" or "nonroutine" health care experi-
ence; for instance, care in an emergency room, outpatient surgery, a hospi-
talization, admission to a nursing home, or home health care.
Pre-recruitment Specification of the Physician Focus Groups
Eight physician focus groups were conducted: two in Philadelphia, two
in New Orleans, one in Chicago, two in Los Angeles, and one in Albuquer-
que (in that order). Again, the composition of the groups was varied by
design. The variables included specialty, HMO concentration, and urban-
rural mix, and the recruitment criteria required that each focus group should
have as even a male-female ratio as possible and some ethnic diversity.
Final Composition of the Groups
For the beneficiary focus groups, individuals were invited to participate
In each group through recruitment procedures based on a screening instru-
ment fielded by the focus group facility. (Appendix C gives an example of
the recruiting "screener.") To ensure that an adequate number of persons
would be available, 14 individuals were invited with an aim of having
groups of 10 participants. Ultimately, five groups had 10 participants, one
group in New York City had 11 participants, one group had 9 participants,
and the nursing home group had 6 participants, for a total of 76 partici-
pants.
At those facilities where more than 10 recruits appeared on the day of the
focus group, selection to reduce the number of participants was made on the
basis of previously mentioned criteria to achieve the desired diversity in
participants. People who were not asked to stay were thanked and reim-
bursed for their time and travel expenses by the research facility staff.
Those who did stay for the session were also paid a nominal fee by the
research facility for their time and travel expenses.
OCR for page 40
40
ALLISON J. WALKER
Table 3.1 displays the main characteristics of the beneficiary groups.
Overall, we had 39 women (51 percent of the total) and 37 men. The
youngest participants were 66 years of age (eight individuals); the oldest
were 90 (in the nursing home group) and 87 (in a community-resident group).
The participants were overwhelmingly white (79 percent); four groups (both
of those in San Francisco, one in Minneapolis, and one in New York City)
met the target for ethnic diversity. The groups were less likely to have had
recent acute or nonroutine health care experience than we had initially
planned; 12 persons in the fee-for-service groups reported such an encoun-
ter in the previous 3 months. All the HMO participants (in Miami and
Minneapolis) reported that they had had an encounter with their HMO since
being covered by Medicare, although most of the encounters were consid-
ered to be nonacute. Finally, a considerable number of participants (55
individuals or 71 percent) reported having some form of Medigap insurance
to supplement their Medicare coverage.
For the physician focus groups, 12 individuals were invited to participate
in each group through recruiting procedures similar to those used for the
beneficiary groups. (Appendix D gives an example of the recruiting
`'screener".) In these groups, the aim was to have 8 to 10 participants.
Ultimately, two groups had 10 participants, two groups had 9 participants,
three groups had 7 participants, and one group had 6 participants, for a total
of 65 participants. Table 3.2 describes the main characteristics of the groups.
Focus Group Process
Before each session, participants were asked to complete a form to verify
basic demographic information including age, sex, and primary occupation
or medical specialty. In addition, the participants were served lunch, din-
ner, or light refreshments, depending upon the time of the session.
The moderator then explained the purpose of the focus groups and indi-
cated that the sessions were being tape-recorded and observed through a
one-way mirror. Finally, the moderator explained the "three rules" of focus
group sessions: (1) that people speak freely and honestly; (2) that discus-
sion be among participants and not directed only to the moderator; and (3)
that only one person speak at a time to ensure that everyone is heard.
To open the discussion, the moderator began by posing a question: "What
are the most positive aspects of medical care, and what are the most nega-
tive aspects of medical care?" Participants then discussed the question in
subgroups of two or three people before reporting their views to the rest of
the group. This approach helped to make people comfortable with speaking
among themselves as well as with the moderator. The moderator then
proceeded through the remaining sections of the guide. Each focus group
session lasted approximately 2 hours.
OCR for page 41
MEDICARE BENEFICIARY AND PHYSICIAN FOCUS GROUPS
FINDINGS OF THE BENEFICIARY FOCUS GROUPS
4
This section summarizes the main points that emerged across the eight
beneficiary focus groups. These main themes are illustrated in the verbatim
quotations from the participants. Notations following each quote signify
the location, type of group, and sex of the participant.3
Personal Experience and Satisfaction with Health Care
Recent Experience
Before being asked any questions about "quality of care," participants
were asked about their experiences and satisfaction with medical care. As
would be expected, some of these Medicare beneficiaries had had consider-
able experience with the health care system. Twenty-one participants re-
ported during the screening stage that they had some acute or nonroutine
care in the previous 3 months. At the focus group sessions, 16 participants
said that they had used emergency rooms, 4 had received home health care,
and 3 had had outpatient surgery. Most of the participants believed they
were in good health.
Satisfaction with Care
Almost all the focus group participants expressed satisfaction with their
own primary physician and the medical care they received. High among the
positive aspects of the health care system was the Medicare program itself.
Many beneficiaries asserted that adequate health care would be a financial
burden without the assistance of Medicare. (As recorded in Table 3.1,
however, many also rely on other insurance to supplement their Medicare
coverage.)
The general perception among participants was that medical care is very
good in the United States much better than in most other countries. Other
positive aspects of medical care frequently mentioned were scientific ad-
vances, the high state of medical technology, increased efficacy of drugs,
and a higher skill-level among providers of care.
"As far as I'm concemed, the general medical care you gee has been pretty
good. I mean, I've come across a lot of competent doctors." (NYC, 65+, M.)
`'The best is the high state of development that has been attained and what it
can do for the individual. It's a great process of medical development."
(NYC, 65-74, M.)
Participants occasionally experienced"system" problems such as finan-
cial and access barriers. A majority of the negative points focused on these
OCR for page 42
42
TABLE 3.1 Selected Characteristics of Focus Group Participants
ALLISON J. WAL1~ER
Recent Has
Health Care Medigap
Group Sex Age Racea Experience ~InsuranceC
Group 1 F 74 H Y Y
F 72 W N Y
New York City F 71 H Y Y
Community residents F 70 W N Y
Fee-for-service Medicare F 68 W N Y
Ages 65 to 74 F 67 W Y N
M 72 W N Y
M 69 W N Y
M 69 W N Y
M 69 B Y N
M 66 W N Y
Group 2 F 86 W N N
F 79 B Y N
New York Ci~r F 78 W N Y
Community residents F 78 W N Y
Fee-for-service Medicare M 87 W N N
Ages 75+ M 79 W Y N
M 78 B Y N
M 77 W Y N
M 77 W N Y
M 75 W N Y
Group 3 F 73 W N N
F 71 W N N
Miami, Florida F 70 W N N
Communi~ residents F 67 B N N
HMO enrollees ~F 67 B N N
Ages 65+ M 82 W N N
M 76 W N Y
M 76 W N N
M 72 W Y Y
M 68 W N N
Group 4 F 78 W N Y
F 70 W N Y
Miami, Florida F 69 W N Y
Fee-for-service Medicare F 66 W Y Y
Ages 65+ M 82 W Y Y
M 78 W Y Y
M 72 H N Y
M 70 W N Y
M 68 B Y Y
OCR for page 43
MEDICARE BENEFICIARY AND PHYSICI0 FOCUS GROUPS
Recent Has
Health Care Medigap
Group Sex Age Racea Experienceb InsuranceC
Group 5 F 80 W N N
F 79 W N Y
Minneapolis, Minnesota F 69 W N Y
Community residents F 67 W Y Y
HMO enrollees ~F 66 W N Y
Ages 65+ M 82 W Y Y
M 80 W Y Y
M 75 W Y Y
M 69 B N Y
M 68 W N Y
Group 6 F 90 W N N
F 81 W Y Y
Minneapolis, Minnesota F 77 W Y Y
Nursing home residents F 74 W N N
Fee-for-service Medicare M 83 W Y Y
Ages 65+
Group 7 F 74 B ~Y
F 74 W Y Y
San Francisco, California F 69 H N Y
Community residents F 66 B N Y
Fee-for-service Medicare F 66 W N Y
Ages 75+ M 70 W Y Y
M 68 W N Y
M 66 W N Y
M 66 H N Y
M 66 W N Y
Group 8 F 83 B Y Y
F 79 W N Y
Sar~ Francisco, California F 78 W ~Y
Community residents F 76 H N Y
Fee-for-service Medicare F 75 W N Y
Ages65to74 M 86 H N N
M 77 W N N
M 77 H ~Y
M 76 W N Y
M 76 W N Y
43
bB is black; H is Hispanic; W is white.
Y is yes and signifies ~at the participant reported a "nonroutine" encounter
with the health care system (e.g., a hospitalization, a visit to the emergency room, or
services from a home health agency) in ~e previous 3 months; N is no.
cy is yes and signifies that the participant reported having some form of a sup-
plemental health insurance in addition to Medicare; N is no.
~Although very few HMO enrollees reported an encounter with the health care
system in the form of a hospitalization, a visit to the emergency room, or services
from a home health agency, all reported that they had received care from their HMO
since being covered by Medicare.
OCR for page 44
44
TABLE 3.2 Charactenstics of Physician Focus Groups
ALLISON ]. W~KER
Sex Age
HMO Affiliationa Specialty
Philadelphia 1
M <45 N Orthopedic Surgery
M <45 Y Thoracic Surgery
M <45 Y Neurosurgery
M <45 N Ophthalmology
M <45 N Colon & Rectal Surgery
M <45 Y Ophthalmology
M <45 Y Urology
F 245 N Obstetrics/Gynecology
F 245 Y Obstetrics/Gynecology
Philadelphia 2
M <45 N Intemal Medicine
M <45 N ~temal Medicine
M <45 N Intemal Medicine
M <45 N Gastroenterology
M <45 N Dermatology
M >45 Y Pulmonary Disease
M 245 Y Cardiology
F 245 Y Neurology
F 245 Y Allergy
F 245 N Oncology
AAFP
M 245 N Family Practice
M >45 N Family Practice
M 245 N Family Practice
M 245 N Family Practice
M <45 N Family Practice
M <45 N Family Practice
M <45 N Family Practice
New Orleans
M 245 Y Urology
M >45 Y Dermatology
M <45 N Ophthalmology
M <45 Y Intemal Medicine
M <45 Y Dermatology
F 245 N Obstetrics/Gynecology
F 245 N Obstetrics/Gynecology
OCR for page 45
AfEDICARE BENEFICIARY A[JD PHYSICIAN FOCUS GROUPS
45
Sex Age
HMO Affiliationa Specialty
Chicago
M >45 Y Intemal Medicine
M >45 N Ear, Nose, & Throat
M 245 N Obstetrics/Gynecology
M <45 Y General Surgery
M <45 Y Ophthalmology
M <45 Y Thoracic Surgery
M <45 Y Intemal Medicine
Los Angeles i
M >45 N Family Practice
M 245 N General Surgery
M 245 N General Surgery
M <45 N Family Practice
M <45 N Ophthalmology
M <45 N General and Vascular Surgery
M <45 N Ear, Nose, & Throat
F <45 N Obstetrics/Gynecology
F >45 Y Ophthalmology
Los Angeles 2
M >45 Y Ear, Nose, & Throat
M >45 N General and Vascular Surgery
M <45 N Urology
M <45 N Urology
M <45 Y Internal Medicine
M <45 Y Internal Medicine
M <45 Y Internal Medicine
F >45 N Family Practice
F <45 Y Obstetrics/Gynecology
F <45 Y Obstetrics/Gynecology
New Mexico
M 245 N Neurology
M <45 N Internal Medicine
M <45 N General Surgery
M <45 N Internal Medicine
F >45 N Anesthesiology
F <45 N Oncology
aHMO is health maintenance organization, N is no, and Y is yes.
OCR for page 80
80
ALLISON J. WALKER
"Now I'd like to explore a little more the question of where you get
information on the quality of health care services."
For instance:
E. Where do you usually get most of your information on the quality of
health care?
F. What do you hear about heath care quality on TV or the radio?
1. What do you read about it in the newspapers or magazines?
G. What other kinds of information do you think is available to you
about the quality of health care services?
USE AS EXAMPLES
1. Hospital mortality rates
2. How often a type of operation is performed by a doctor or in a
particular hospital
3. information on malpractice claims or physicians inspector's re-
ports on nursing homes
H. From what sources would you like to receive additional information
on the quality of health care?
I. Would you be likely to make use of such information services if they
were available?
For instance:
1. If you or someone close to you were going into the hospital for
surgery, would you like to know beforehand the mortality rate of
that hospital or of particular physicians for that kind of operation?
2. Would you like to know the mortality rate of hospitals in your
area, in case you ever had to go to one in an emergency?
V1. SUGGESTIONS FOR IMPROVING THE QUALITY OF MEDICAL
CARE (15 min)
(At this point, the moderator will leave the room to confer with the
observers to see if they have any points they would like the group to
address in greater depth)
"What is the one thing that most needs to be done to
care?"
ASK EACH PERSON IN GROUP
i:
mprove quality of
OCR for page 81
MEDICARE BENEFICIARY AND PHYSICIAN FOCUS GROUPS
APPENDIX B
MODERATOR'S GUIDE FOR THE PHYSICIAN FOCUS GROUPS
INTRODUCTION AND WARM-UP (10 minutes)
A. Introduction of the moderator
B. Introduction of sponsor and purpose of the focus group
81
"The Institute of Medicine is part of the National Academy of Sciences.
It is a private research institution established in 1970 to conduct studies
for and provide advice to a wide range of government agencies and
private concerns and foundations.
Congress has asked the Institute of Medicine to develop strategies to
review and assure quality within the Medicare program.
As part of this process, last spring the Institute conducted a series of
focus groups around the country with elderly Medicare beneficiaries to
understand their views about quality of care.
The expert committee overseeing this study is also holding public hear-
ings with testimony from physician groups, hospital groups, consumer
groups, and other health care organizations. A series of site visits are
under way to cities around the country to talk with people in hospitals
and other health facilities.
The focus group you are participating in today is one of eight to be held
in different areas of the country in which we are specifically seeking
the views of office-based physicians who care for the elderly. I will be
asking for your opinions and advice about assuring quality of care for
Medicare patients."
C. Stress focus on quality, not cost. Not intended as criticism, but
opportunity to give physicians a chance to provide input on important
issues pertaining to health care.
D. Description of focus group process and ground rules
Mention tapes, observers, confidentiality, one-at-a-time, and refresh-
ments.
E. Introduction of participants
Introduce and identify specialty and type of practice. Rotate asking
most rewarding aspect of providing care for Medicare patients and most
difficult part of providing care for Medicare patients.
OCR for page 82
82
II. DEFINITION OF QUALITY HEALTH CARE (15 minutes)
ALLISON J. WALKER
A. "Before we talk about the Medicare program, can we talk in general
about defining "quality" in medical care? How would you define qual-
ity in medical care what are the dimensions of quality?"
B. What differentiates good health care from poor health care?
III. QUALITY OF CARE IN THE MEDICARE PROGRAM (10 minutes)
A. General Quality Issues
"Now let me turn the discussion to the Medicare program. From your
perspective as a practicing physician . . ."
1. "Does the Medicare program and the way it is run affect the quality
of care you and other doctors provide to your patients?" (focus on any
limitations caused by the Medicare payment system, review system, or
other factors)
B. Location of Quality Problems
"We've been talking about a lot of different issues so far. If you could
generalize about problems in care affecting Medicare patients, what
would you say that the main problems in quality are?"
PROBE IF NOT MENTIONED SPECIFICALLY:
overuse of services
underuse of services
· · . . . ~.
1.
2.
3. poor physician SklllS
4. outdated physician skills
5. physician training/retraining
6. poor lab services or other support services
7. personal problems of physicians (substance abuse, etc.)
8. something else?
PROBE: HOW SERIOUS OR PERVASIVE ARE THESE PROB
LEMS?
C. Other issues to probe (OPTIONAL)
"I'd like to ask about some specific quality of care issues we have been
hearing about from the elderly and in our public hearings."
SKIP ANY ISSUES THAT HAVE ALREADY BEEN RAISED
1. lack of information for decision-making
2. not enough time with physicians
OCR for page 83
MEDICARE BENEFICIARY AND PHYSICIAN FOCUS GROUPS
3. continuity of care who is responsible
4. conflict of interest
5. differences among physicians and hospitals in the same area
83
PROBE POINTS: HOW SERIOUS OR PERVASIVE ARE THE
PROBLEMS AND WHAT ARE TEN REASONS FOR TOM?
IV. AREAS TO TARGET FOR QUALITY ASSURANCE (30 minutes)
A. Focus of Quality Assurance Efforts
"In terms of all the quality-of-care issues that the Medicare program
might be concerned with, what (in your view) is the relative importance
of dealing wig poor practitioners as contrasted with Dying to improve
the general or "average" quality of health care provided?"
B. Analysis Using Schematic Aid
"I'm handing out to you a schematic table with two dimensions along
which problems in health care quality exist that are under the control of
the physician."
DESCRIBE HANDOUT
1. Where would you say most of the problems in quality lie?
2. For each category, what proportion of care by all physicians
could be put under each category?
3. What proportion of doctors can be defined as outliers?
HANDOUT
Type of Average Outlier
Quality Problem Physician Physician
Over Provision
of Services
Under Provision
of Services
.
Poor Physician
Skills or Knowledge
Outdated Physician
Skills
OCR for page 84
84
ALLISON J. WALKER
4. For each problem, what would be the most effective quality
assurance mechanism?
V. ASSESSMENT OF MAJOR QUALITY ASSURANCE MECHANISMS
(40 minutes)
A. Knowledge of Quality Assurance Mechanisms
"Now I'd like to turn our attention to something different the
mechanisms for maintaining or improving quality."
1. What procedures or systems are most important for assuring the
quality of medical care?
PROBE UNDERSTANDING OF PEER REVIEW SYSTEM
2. For each of the problem areas we have been talking about:
a. What ideas do you have for addressing He problem?
b. How difficult/costly would it be to address the problem?
c. What role should Medicare play in addressing the problem?
d. How much progress do you think can be expected?
e. Is it worth it?
B. Are there any ocher mechanisms of quality assurance?
IF ANY OF THE FOLLOWING HAS NOT BEEN MENTIONED, ASK
ABOUT IT.
1. Individually focused mechanisms
a. state licensing and state board of medical examiners
b. specialty board certification/periodic recertification
c. continuing medical education
2. Hospital-based mechanisms
a. hospital privileging process
1. admitting privileges
2. privileges to perform certain kinds of procedures
b. master physicians who serve as proctors (as corrective ac-
tions for doctors identified as providing poor quality)
c. hospital peer review activities
d. private review such as Joint Commission accreditation
3. Externally based mechanisms
a. PRO program for Medicare
b. exclusion from the Medicare program
c. the legal system - malpractice
OCR for page 85
MEDICARE BENEFICIARY AND PHYSICIAN FOCUS GROUPS
4. Information-based mechanisms
85
a. analysis and feedback of physician or provider-specific in
~ .
formation
1. making public certain kinds of information about the
quality of care of hospitals or doctors
2. public disclosure of hospital-specific mortality rates
b. review of office-based records against physician-developed
criteria
surveying patients about practitioners
C. How do physicians acquire new skills or upgrade existing skills
once out in practice?
D. To what extent can a physician keep up with the knowledge explo-
sion in medicine? How do they do so?
RELATE TO QUALITY ASSURANCE MECHANISMS OF LICENS-
ING, CERTIFICATION, RECERTIFICATION, PRIVILEGING, CON-
TINUING EDUCATION, MASTER PHYSICIANS, AND PEER RE-
VIEW.
E. How effective are these quality assurance systems?
1. generally
2. for dealing with the outlier physician
F. Addressing Specific Problems
"The study committee has been asked to consider some specific kinds
of problems. So, how adequately do you think existing quality assur-
ance methods address each of the following problems?"
1. the impaired physician (psychological or substance abuse)
2. a physician whose skills and knowledge are out of date
3. a provider in a rural or otherwise isolated setting who gives
substandard care
4. a physician or hospital that has a pattern of poor performance or
patient outcomes
G. What can Medicare do to address each of these problems?
MODERATOR LEAVES THE ROOM
TO CONFER WITH THE OBSERVER
H. Suggestions for Change (15 minutes)
1. "What one change do you think practicing physicians would
most readily support that would most improve the quality of care
Medicare patients receive?"
OCR for page 86
86
ALLISON J. WALKER
APPENDIX C
RECRUITING SCREENER: MEDICARE BENEFICIARY
FOCUS GROUPS
Fee-For-Service Groups
New York City, NY
San Francisco, CA
Hello, I am from . We are conducting a study of health
care for the Institute of Medicine of the National Academy of Sciences. For
this study, we are seeking the opinions of people ages 65 and over.
1. Do any men age 65 and over live in this household?
a. YES May I speak with him please?
b. No- Do any women age 65 and over live in this household?
1. YES May I speak with her please?
2. NO terminate.
QUOTA: AT LEAST 6 MALES IN FINAL GROUPS, AND NO MORE
THAN 8
(When speaking to the appropriate person) Hello, I am_ from
. The Institute of Medicine of the National Academy of Sciences is
doing a study of health care today. We will be inviting a small number of
older Americans to take part in a research discussion of their experiences
and views about health care. We would like a diverse group for this discus-
sion, and would, therefore, like to ask you a few questions. All of your
responses will be kept confidential.
First, I need to ask you a few questions.
2. Are you covered by Medicare?
a. YES
b. NO-terminate
3. May I ask your age?
a. YES
b. NO May I ask if you are:
a. 65 - 74
b. 75 and over
GROUP A: 65 - 74
GROUP B: 75 AND OVER
If respondent wiI1 not give age, terminate conversation.
QUOTA: AT LEAST 5 PEOPLE IN EACH GROUP NEED TO ANSWER
"YES" TO QUESTION 4
OCR for page 87
MEDICARE BENEFICIARY AND PHYSICI~ FOCUS GROUPS
87
4. In the past 3 months, have you (or your spouse) been a patient in a
hospital, had surgery when you did not have to be hospitalized, had to go to
a hospital emergency room, or had nursing home or home health care?
a. YES
b. NO IF QUOTA NOT MET, TERMINATE CONVERSATION
5. Has your primary occupation been in the health field; that is, have you
been a doctor, nurse, hospital administrator, or other health care profes-
sional?
a. YES-terminate
b. NO
6. As I mentioned before, we would like to learn the views on health care
of a diverse group of people. As such, may I ask your racial or ethnic
background?
QUOTA: AT LEAST THREE NON-WHITE OR HIS-
PANIC IN EACH GROUP
We would like to invite you to join us for a discussion group on health
care issues. The sponsor of the group is the Institute of Medicine of the
National Academy of Sciences. Our purpose is to learn about people's
views toward health care. No one will try to sell you anything. The
discussion group will be held on at
Refreshments will
be served. We are located at . The discussion will take approxi-
mately two hours. The discussion leader will be an expert in this area,
whose name is Mathew Greenwald. About 10 other people like your-
self will participate. You will receive $30 for your hme and pariicipa-
tion, and your transportation expenses will be paid.
Will you be able to attend?
a. YES
b. NO is there anyone else in your household above age 65 who
might be able to attend?
1. YES-May I speak with him/her?
repeat screener
2. NO terminate conversation
NAME:
ADDRESS:
TELEPHONE:
OCR for page 88
88
ALUSON J. WALKER
Let me repeat your name and address to make sure we have it correct.
REPEAT NAME AND ADDRESS
Would you like me to repeat the discussion group date, time, and loca-
tion to make sure you have it written down correctly?
IF YES, REPEAT DATE, TIME, AND LOCATION
Thank you. You will be receiving a reminder post card and we will call
again to make sure you will be able to attend.
APPENDIX D
RECRUITING SCREENER: PHYSICIAN FOCUS GROUPS
High HMO Concentration Groups
Los Angeles, CA
Hello, I am from . We are conducting a study of the
quality of health care for the Institute of Medicine of the National Academy
of Sciences. For this study, we have been asked to contact a group of
doctors in your area. Dr. 's name was selected at random, and we
would like to ask him/her a few questions for this study.
1. Is doctor available to speak with us?
a. YES May I speak with him/her for just a few minutes?
b. NO ARRANGE FOR A RETURN CALL OR CALL BACK TIME
(When speaking to the appropriate person) Hello, I am from
. The Institute of Medicine of the National Academy of Sciences is
conducting a study of physician's opinions about quality of health care. We
will be inviting a small number of doctors from your area to take part in a
research discussion of their views about health care quality. We would like
a diverse group for this discussion, and therefore, need to ask you a few
questions. All of your responses will be kept confidential.
2. First of all, do you maintain an office-based medical practice?
a. YES Are you affiliated with an HMO or IPA? (NOTE: HEALTH
MAINTENANCE ORGANIZATION OR INDEPENDENT PRACTICE
AS SOCIATION)
1. YES With which HMO are you affiliated?
2. NO
OCR for page 89
fEDIC~E BENEFICIARY ED P~SICI~ FOCUS GROUPS
89
b. NO Are you a staff physician for an HMO (Health Maintenance
Organization)?
1. YES-With which HMO are you affiliated?
2. NO-terminate conversation.
QUOTA: AT LEAST 4 HMO PHYSICIANS, AND NO MORE THAN
THREE FROM ANY ONE HMO
3. Would you say that at least 20% of the patients you have treated over the
past year were over age 65?
a. YES
b. NO terminate conversation.
4. What is your medical specialty?
TERMINATE CONVERSATION IF DOCTOR IS A PSYCHOLOGIST, AN
ALLERGIST, A PEDIATRICIAN, OR AN EMERGENCY ROOM PlIYSI-
CIAN.
QUOTAS: RECRUIT NO MORE THAN IWO FROM EACH OF THE
FOLLOWING SPECIALTIES:
INTERNAL MEDICINE
Cardiovascular Disease
Gastroenterology
Pulmonary Disease
Neurology
Dermatology
FAMILY MEDICINE
GENERAL PRACTICE
5. Are you under age 45 or older?
a. under 45
b. over 45
6. DON'T ASK, BUT RECORD SEX
7.
SURGERY
General Surgery
Neurology
Otolaryngology (ENT)
Colon and Rectal Surgery
Thoracic Surgery
Urology
Obstetrics and Gynecology
a. Male
b. Female QUOTA: AT LEAST TWO FEMALES
Have you been a participant in a focus group within the past three
months?
a. YES-terminate conversation
b. NO
OCR for page 90
9o
ALL lSON J. WALKER
We would like to invite you to join us for a discussion group on health
care issues. The sponsor of this group is the Institute of Medicine of the
National Academy of Sciences, a private research institution not associated
with any government agency. Our purpose is to learn about physicians'
views towards the quality of health care. No one will try to sell you
anything. The discussion group will be held on at_ . Re-
freshments and a buffet will be served. The discussion will take approxi-
mately two hours and you will be paid for your time and participa-
tion. About 10 other doctors will participate. The discussion leader will be
Mathew Greenwald, who has a great deal of experience with research in
this area.
Will you be able to attend?
a. YES get name/address information
b. NO Is there another physician in your office who might be able to
attend?
1. YES May I speak with that doctor please?
REPEAT SCREENER
2. NO thank and terminate conversation.
NAME:
ADDRESS:
TELEPHONE:
Let me repeat your name and address to make sure we have it correct.
REPEAT NAME AND ADDRESS
Would you like me to repeat the discussion group date, time, and location?
IF YES, REPEAT DATE, TIME, AND LOCATION
Thank you. You will be receiving a reminder post card and we will call
again to make sure you will be able to attend. Should your schedule change,
making it impossible for you to attend, please let us know as soon as
possible so that we may find a replacement. Our number is
Representative terms from entire chapter:
physician focus
