OPPE, FPPE, QPS, and why the alphabet soup of physician assessment is essential for safer patient care

An International Survey of Quality and Safety Programs in Radiology

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to determine the status of radiology quality improvement programs in a variety of selected nations worldwide.

METHODS

A survey was developed by select members of the International Economics Committee of the American College of Radiology on quality programs and was distributed to committee members. Members responded on behalf of their country. The 51-question survey asked about 12 different quality initiatives which were grouped into 4 themes: departments, users, equipment, and outcomes. Respondents reported whether a designated type of quality initiative was used in their country and answered subsequent questions further characterizing it.

RESULTS

The response rate was 100% and represented Australia, Canada, China, England, France, Germany, India, Israel, Japan, the Netherlands, Russia, and the United States. The most frequently reported quality initiatives were imaging appropriateness (91.7%) and disease registries (91.7%), followed by key performance indicators (83.3%) and morbidity and mortality rounds (83.3%). Peer review, equipment accreditation, radiation dose monitoring, and structured reporting were reported by 75.0% of respondents, followed by 58.3% of respondents for quality audits and critical incident reporting. The least frequently reported initiatives included Lean/Kaizen exercises and physician performance assessments, implemented by 25.0% of respondents.

CONCLUSION

There is considerable diversity in the quality programs used throughout the world, despite some influence by national and international organizations, from whom further guidance could increase uniformity and optimize patient care in radiology.

Ongoing Professional Practice Evaluation for Emergency Medicine Physicians in a Large Health Care System

OBJECTIVE

Ongoing professional practice evaluation (OPPE) is designed to identify professional practice trends that affect quality and safety of practicing physicians. Focused professional practice evaluation (FPPE) is employed when physician nonconformance is identified. The goal of this novel OPPE initiative was threefold: (1) meet The Joint Commission's accreditation standards, (2) assess documentation for compliance and risk, and (3) maintain procedural competency to provide optimal patient care.

METHODS

A quality assurance project with OPPE program development was initiated in 18 emergency departments across a large health care system. First, a monthly comprehensive peer review meeting assessed cases across the system for medicolegal risk. Physicians with reasonable practice concerns were identified and referred to FPPE. Second, a standardized OPPE chart review was performed biannually by a quality assurance committee assessing all physician charts for clinical care, medicolegal risk, and quality. Last, completion of a procedure lab every three years was required to maintain competency.

OUTCOMES

For systemwide peer review in 2019, 47 cases were referred and 12.8% had quality concerns. For standardized OPPE chart review, 221 physicians were reviewed on 1,219 charts on the following metrics: insufficient medical decision making, diagnoses not medical/legally supported, and charts with red flags. Nine physicians (4.1%) and 17 charts (1.4%) were deficient in all three measures, and 8 physicians (3.6%) had deficiencies in ≥ 50% of their charts. For procedure lab competency, 19.0% of physicians completed the lab in 2019 with no quality concerns.

CONCLUSION

A structured OPPE algorithm can aid large health care systems in identifying deviations from practice standards for which additional FPPE can be beneficial.