Clinical peer review program self-evaluation for US hospitals.
Prior research has shown wide variation in clinical peer review program structure, process, governance, and perceived effectiveness. This study sought to validate the utility of a Peer Review Program Self-Evaluation Tool as a potential guide to physician and hospital leaders seeking greater program value. Data from 330 hospitals show that the total score from the self-evaluation tool is strongly associated with perceived quality impact. Organizational culture also plays a significant role. When controlling for these factors, there was no evidence of benefit from a multispecialty review process. Physicians do not generally use reliable methods to measure clinical performance. A high rate of change since 2007 has not produced much improvement. The Peer Review Program Self-Evaluation Tool reliably differentiates hospitals along a continuum of perceived program performance. The full potential of peer review as a process to improve the quality and safety of care has yet to be realized.
Edwards
Marc T
MT
QA to QI Consulting, West Hartford, CT 06107, USA. marc@QAtoQI.com
D001291:Attitude of Health Personnel; D006739:Hospital Administration / Q000379:methods* / Q000706:statistics & numerical data; D006801:Humans; D008505:Medical Staff, Hospital / Q000706:statistics & numerical data*; D015279:Organizational Culture; D018024:Peer Review, Health Care / Q000379:methods*; D019984:Quality Indicators, Health Care / Q000706:statistics & numerical data*; D017751:Safety Management / Q000458:organization & administration / Q000706:statistics & numerical data; D011795:Surveys and Questionnaires; D014481:United States