Search

The Outcome and Assessment Information Set (OASIS) is used for outcome reporting, quality improvement, and case mix adjustment of per-episode payment for home health care. The research described here addresses interrater reliability of OASIS items and compares clinician time required to complete patient assessment with and without OASIS. Interrater reliability for OASIS data items was estimated using independent assessments by two clinicians for a sample of 66 patients. Incremental assessment time due to OASIS was estimated using interview data from two agency-matched groups of clinical care providers-one group who used OASIS in the assessment and a second group whose assessment did not include OASIS items. Interrater reliability is excellent (kappa > .80) for many OASIS items and substantial (kappa > 0.60) for most items. The reported time required to complete an assessment with OASIS did not differ from the time required for a comparable assessment without OASIS. The results of this study are being used to guide developmental efforts to improve OASIS items. They can also be informative to home health care agencies when interpreting OASIS-based outcome and case mix reports. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The outcomes movement in home health care is expanding rapidly, with strong support from both the industry and Medicare. The Federal government has proposed requiring all Medicare-certified agencies to collect data items from the Outcome and Assessment Information Set (OASIS) to form the basis for standardized risk-adjusted outcome reporting as part of a systematic outcome-based quality improvement (OBQI) approach. In addition to contributing to improving patient outcomes, OASIS data items, when combined with other assessment information, utilization data, and cost information, can provide home health care agencies with a powerful integrated information set for internal management and strategic planning. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Outcome and Assessment Information Set (OASIS) is used for outcome reporting, quality improvement, and case mix adjustment of per-episode payment for home health care. The research described here addresses interrater reliability of OASIS items and compares clinician time required to complete patient assessment with and without OASIS. Interrater reliability for OASIS data items was estimated using independent assessments by two clinicians for a sample of 66 patients. Incremental assessment time due to OASIS was estimated using interview data from two agency-matched groups of clinical care providers-one group who used OASIS in the assessment and a second group whose assessment did not include OASIS items. Interrater reliability is excellent (kappa > .80) for many OASIS items and substantial (kappa > 0.60) for most items. The reported time required to complete an assessment with OASIS did not differ from the time required for a comparable assessment without OASIS. The results of this study are being used to guide developmental efforts to improve OASIS items. They can also be informative to home health care agencies when interpreting OASIS-based outcome and case mix reports.

A new tool is available for agencies to use with their patient tally reports derived from OASIS data. By using queries submitted to the outcome and case mix tally reports, agencies can select a group of care episodes for follow-up in the process-of-care investigation portion of their outcome enhancement activities. An example of how an agency used the tool to select care episodes for review is provided.

After obtaining the risk-adjusted and descriptive outcome report, the first activity of outcome enhancement involves selecting one or two target outcomes. This article outlines the criteria for target outcomes selection and features a suggested timeline.

Analysis of OASIS data produces several types of agency-level (aggregate) reports. This article describes the components of the risk-adjusted and descriptive outcome report.

Objectives: To evaluate effects on patient outcomes of Outcome-Based Quality Improvement (OBQI), a continuous quality improvement methodology for home health care (HHC)., Design: A quasi-experimental design with prospective pre/post and study/control components within two multiyear demonstration trials (occurring from 1995 to 2000) in which 73 home health agencies implemented OBQI, receiving several annual cycles of outcome reports to evaluate and enhance patient outcomes., Setting: New York and 27 other states., Participants: The study involved 157,548 predominantly older adult patients admitted over 3 years to 54 OBQI agencies from 27 states in the National Demonstration Trial, 105,917 patients admitted over 4 years to 19 OBQI agencies in the New York State Trial, and 248,621 patients admitted over 3 years to non-OBQI control agencies in the 27 demonstration states., Intervention: As a clinical management and administrative intervention, OBQI involves collecting, encoding, and transmitting patient-level health status data to a central source that provides each OBQI agency with a risk-adjusted outcome report comparing the agency's patient outcomes with those from a reference population and with its own outcomes from the prior period. Target outcomes are selected and focused plans of action implemented to change care behaviors. Outcome changes are evaluated through the next report cycle., Measurements: Outcome measures include hospitalization rates and improvement and stabilization outcome rates in functional, physiological, emotional/behavioral, and cognitive health., Results: For the National and New York State Demonstration Trials, the risk-adjusted relative rates of decline in hospitalization of 22% and 26%, respectively, for OBQI patients over the 3-year and 4-year demonstration periods were significant (P <.001) and unparalleled by considerably smaller rates of decline for the non-OBQI patients in the 27 states. The risk-adjusted rates of improvement in OBQI target outcome measures of health status averaged 5% to 7% per year in both demonstration trials and were significantly greater (P <.05) than analogous improvement rates for nontarget comparison outcomes, which averaged about 1% per year., Conclusion: It is feasible to integrate the programmatic, data collection, data transmission, and outcome enhancement components of OBQI into the day-to-day operations of home health agencies. The aggregate findings and the agency-level evidence available from site-specific communications suggest that OBQI had a pervasive effect on outcome improvement for home health patients. OBQI appears to warrant expansion and refinement in HHC and experimentation in other healthcare settings.

The utility of examining the effectiveness of home care is illustrated by selected examples and applications. The growth rate of home care over the past decade, questions regarding the possibly substantial differences between the quality of home care in rural and urban America, and empirical evidence that suggests inferior quality of home care for health maintenance organization patients support the need for measuring and monitoring outcomes of home care. The conclusions of a research program targeted at developing a system of outcome measures for home care, and the resulting national demonstration program to implement and refine that system, are summarized.

The growth in home health care in the United States since 1970, and the exponential increase in the provision of Medicare-covered home health services over the past 5 years, underscores the critical need to assess the effectiveness of home health care in our society. This article presents conceptual and applied topics and approaches involved in assessing effectiveness through measuring the outcomes of home health care. Definitions are provided for a number of terms that relate to quality of care, outcome measures, risk adjustment, and quality assurance (QA) in home health care. The goal is to provide an overview of a potential systemwide approach to outcome-based QA that has its basis in a partnership between the home health industry and payers or regulators.

Increased use of home care services, and the provision of more sophisticated care to acutely ill patients, have prompted concern about quality assurance in home settings. A conceptual framework is proposed to assess home health-care quality based on two premises: outcome, process, and structural measures, first, are required to evaluate quality accurately; classification of patients into quality indicator groups (QUIGs), second, permits specification and use of more practical and valid quality measures. The framework may prove useful because measures are related directly to patient conditions, services rendered, and treatment objectives. Further reliability and validity testing of the QUIGs and a system of operational quality measures are currently underway.