Practice Quality Improvement (PQI)Summit

Harvey L. Neiman, M.D., FACR

Executive Director

August 18, 2007

American College of RadiologyQuality Timeline

• Quality and Safety Year Began– Voluntary Mammography Accreditation 1987– Radiation Oncology Accreditation 1987– Standards and guidelines 1990– MQSA 1994– Appropriateness Criteria 1995– CT, MR and other accreditation

• Ultrasound 1995• MR 1996• Nuclear Medicine 1999• CT, PET 2002

– RADPEER™• RADPEER™ 2002• eRADPEER™ 2005

– NRDR 2006– MR Safety White Paper (Kanal) 2007– Radiation Dose White Paper (Amis) 2007

Quality Practice

Targeted Education

Goal

The Tools(Process)

RADPEER GRIDDose Index

RegistryOther

Registries

UnderlyingConcepts(Structure)

Standards andGuidelines

AccreditationAppropriateness

Criteria

The ACR Approach to PQI

RadKat

RADPEER™ is an easy to use tool developed to allow radiologists to do peer review during the course of a day’s work.

When a new study is interpreted with a prior study for comparison, a peer review of the accuracy of the interpretation of the previous examination occurs

RADPEER™

RadPeer™ – What is it?

• RADPEER™ is part of a department’s quality program. After submission of practice data to the ACR, the radiology chair or medical director can access the reports online at any time.

The reports provide: • Summary statistics and comparisons for each participating

radiologist by modality • Summary data for the group by modality • Data summed across all RADPEER™ participants by modality

RADPEER™

• RADPEER™ is a tool for PQI. It is not a project.

Four point scoring system:

1 Concur with interpretation

2 Difficult diagnosis, not ordinarily expected to be made

3 Diagnosis should be made most of the time

4 Diagnosis should be made almost every time/misinterpretation of findings

Score of 3 or 4 should be reviewed through the facility’s internal QA process prior to submission to ACR

RADPEER™

All data collected by ACR are considered to be privilegedand confidential peer review records of ACR and are thus

subject to legal protection of the Medical Malpractice Act of Virginia, Section 8.01-581.17 of Code of Virginia 8/10/01

e RADPEER™

RADPEER™ - Issues

• Positive Aspects– Available in variety of formats – paper, PDA, Web– Easy to use– Wide acceptance (as of July 2007)

• 514 active sites (practices)– 223 paper

– 291 eRADPEER

• 7525 Radiologists– Part of an overall program

RADPEER™ - Issues (2)

• Deficiencies– No external validation of an institution’s reviews– No normalization of one practice to another– The number of cases entered varies significantly– Only compartmentalizes by modality– No obligatory remediation

RADPEER™ - Addressing of Deficiencies

• Validation and normalization of data – Ideas– Web based blinded review from other practices – Site reviews for accreditation to include RADPEER reviews– Normalized to “exemplary sites”– Benchmarking using GRID

• Plans underway to evaluate by organ/body part and possibly disease process

• Systems available to “force” compliance• Correlation with RadKat (Radiology Knowledge Assessment Test)

RADPEER™ Committee

• Kenneth Chin, MD, Chair• David Dixon, MD• Charles Grimes, MD• David Linkous, MD• Albert Nemcek, MD• Robert Pyatt, MD• Richard Redvanly, MD• Trudie Cushing

Quality Practice

Targeted Education

Goal

The Tools(Process)

RADPEER GRIDDose Index

RegistryOther

Registries

UnderlyingConcepts(Structure)

Standards andGuidelines

AccreditationAppropriateness

Criteria

The ACR Approach to PQI

RadKat

National Radiology Data Registry, Chair: Jeff Weinreb, MD, FACR

GRID, Interim Chair: Harvey Neiman, MD, FACR

ACR-NCR, Chair: R Nick Bryan, MD, PhD

Dose Index Registry, Chair: Richard Morin, PhD, FACR

CTC Registry, Chair: Dan Johnson, MD

CCTA Registry, Chair: Art Stillman, MD, PhD

NMD, Chair: Edward Sickles, MD, FACR

NOPR

Technical Advisory Group, Chair: David Channin, MD

NRDR Overview

• Purpose of NRDR is to enhance your practice, the specialty of radiology, and the care patients receive by providing accurate and objective measures of practice processes and outcomes.

• Establishes benchmarks to allow comparison of facility or physician data to that of the region and the nation.

• Gives unified mechanism for security, data storing, content management, common data elements for future research projects

• Provides users with a single front-end with ACR on-line services and single sign-on

• Builds on the success of RADPEER™ and the National Oncologic PET Registry

NRDR Overview (2)

• It is a data warehouse – a database of databases– Each registry functions independently– Leverages the Technology– Allows information to be shared across registries

• ACR Registries can be and are a cooperative effort with other societies– NOPR: Academy for Molecular Imaging, SNM, ASCO,

ACRIN– ACR/NCR: SIR, ASNR, ASITN– NRDR: RSNA

NRDR Overview (3)

• ACR/NCR introduced June 2007• National Oncologic PET Registry

– Over 40,000 patients entered– Over 1500 sites participating

General Radiology Improvement Database (GRID)

• GRID is a key tool for objectively measuring performance indicators for the purpose of evaluating and improving facility processes and outcomes.

• Simple, objective, numeric monitoring of data• Standardized collection of measures allows for valid

comparisons across similar facility types• Performance measures include volume, structural measures,

protocols, personnel training, safety, process measures, outcomes and customer satisfaction

General Radiology Improvement DatabaseSample GRID Data Elements

• General Facility Information– Type of institution (academic, community, community –

teaching)– Location (urban, suburban, rural)– Annual volume

Sample GRID Data Elements

• Structural Measures– Flouroscopy time reported– Report access 24/7

• Protocols– Pregnancy, allergies, infection control, etc.

• Personnel– CME hours, certification

• Safety– Personnel training, documentation of medications and

allergies

Sample GRID Data Elements

• Process Measures– Patient wait time– Time from order to exam– Report turnaround time

• Outcomes– % insufficient tissue for liver biopsy – Pneumothorax rate on lung biopsy requiring intervention– % negative head CT– BIRAD code % (screening)

Sample GRID Data Elements

• Other GRID elements– Patient satisfaction survey – Referring physician satisfaction survey

GRID (General Radiology Improvement Database

• Goal is to have Version 1.0 available for pilot testing by January 1, 2008. Likely to be predominately manual

• Working to develop Version 2.0 as mainly electronic data entry

ACR ApproachACR RadKat*RADPEER™*ACR Education Center™ ACR Campus™Benchmarking (NRDR)

Do you Own it?

Do you Know it?

*Questions by Modality, Body Part and Disease Type

SAM Credit

CME Weekend Course

Did you Do it?

Radiology Knowledge Assessment Test (RadKat)

• Self administered, low stress• Personalized assessment of skills• Based on expertise with DIXIT and TIXIT as well as CPI

(Continuous Professional Improvement)• 50 questions in each area of practice or areas that taker wants to

be assessed• Results only to the taker of the exam

– Benchmarked to others with similar practice patterns• Radiologist may correlate results of RadPeer and RadKAT

Practice Quality ImprovementSummary

• RADPEER™ is a tool that can be used for PQI• RADPEER™ has many strengths

– We recognize and are addressing the deficiencies• RADPEER™, GRID and RadKat are key elements in the ACR’s

approach to helping practices and individual radiologists accomplish PQI;