Skip to main content
NCBI home page
American Journal of Public Health logoLink to American Journal of Public Health
. 1985 Jan;75(1):43–46. doi: 10.2105/ajph.75.1.43

Limitations of provider interventions in hypertension quality assurance.

R N Winickoff, S Wilner, R Neisuler, G O Barnett
PMCID: PMC1646142  PMID: 3966597

Abstract

In an institutional quality assurance program in hypertension, performance of tests, control of blood pressure, and follow-up were monitored through a computer program that was developed to audit records in an automated record system. Two types of feedback previously shown to be effective were provided quarterly for a period of one year to experimental providers. For all hypertensives considered together, there were no differences between scores of Experimental and Control providers based on percentage of patients meeting pre-set criteria in testing--87% vs 87%--, blood pressure control--58% vs 59%--, or follow-up--79% vs 77%. Only small but significant differences occurred in the subgroup of moderate to severe hypertensives. There appear to be limitations to what can be accomplished through hypertension quality assurance interventions directed at providers of care in this institutional setting. Interventions designed to deal directly with patients whose blood pressures are uncontrolled may be more effective.

Full text

PDF
43

Selected References

These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.

  1. Barnett G. O., Winickoff R. N., Morgan M. M., Zielstorff R. D. A computer-based monitoring system for follow-up of elevated blood pressure. Med Care. 1983 Apr;21(4):400–409. doi: 10.1097/00005650-198304000-00003. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Barnett G. O., Winickoff R., Dorsey J. L., Morgan M. M., Lurie R. S. Quality assurance through automated monitoring and concurrent feedback using a computer-based medical information system. Med Care. 1978 Nov;16(11):962–970. doi: 10.1097/00005650-197811000-00007. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. De Dombal F. T., Leaper D. J., Horrocks J. C., Staniland J. R., McCann A. P. Human and computer-aided diagnosis of abdominal pain: further report with emphasis on performance of clinicians. Br Med J. 1974 Mar 2;1(5904):376–380. doi: 10.1136/bmj.1.5904.376. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Dickinson J. C., Warshaw G. A., Gehlbach S. H., Bobula J. A., Muhlbaier L. H., Parkerson G. R., Jr Improving hypertension control: impact of computer feedback and physician education. Med Care. 1981 Aug;19(8):843–854. doi: 10.1097/00005650-198108000-00004. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Eraker S. A., Kirscht J. P., Becker M. H. Understanding and improving patient compliance. Ann Intern Med. 1984 Feb;100(2):258–268. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-100-2-258. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Feldman J., Wilner S., Winickoff R. A study of lithium carbonate use in a health maintenance organization. QRB Qual Rev Bull. 1982 Sep;8(9):8–14. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Hirsch E. O. Utilization review as a means of continuing education. Med Care. 1974 Apr;12(4):358–362. doi: 10.1097/00005650-197404000-00007. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Inui T. S., Yourtee E. L., Williamson J. W. Improved outcomes in hypertension after physician tutorials. A controlled trial. Ann Intern Med. 1976 Jun;84(6):646–651. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-84-6-646. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. LoGerfo J. P. Hypertension. Management in a prepaid health care project. JAMA. 1975 Jul 21;233(3):245–248. doi: 10.1001/jama.233.3.245. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. MANTEL N., HAENSZEL W. Statistical aspects of the analysis of data from retrospective studies of disease. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1959 Apr;22(4):719–748. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. McDonald C. J. Protocol-based computer reminders, the quality of care and the non-perfectability of man. N Engl J Med. 1976 Dec 9;295(24):1351–1355. doi: 10.1056/NEJM197612092952405. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. Morgan M., Studney D. R., Barnett G. O., Winickoff R. N. Computerized concurrent review of prenatal care. QRB Qual Rev Bull. 1978 Sep;4(9):33–36. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. Schroeder S. A., Kenders K., Cooper J. K., Piemme T. E. Use of laboratory tests and pharmaceuticals. Variation among physicians and effect of cost audit on subsequent use. JAMA. 1973 Aug 20;225(8):969–973. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. Williamson J. W., Alexander M., Miller G. E. Continuing education and patient care research. Physician response to screening test results. JAMA. 1967 Sep 18;201(12):938–942. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  15. Wilner S., Winickoff R. N., Schoenbaum S. C., Coltin K. L. The role of patient interventions in ambulatory quality assurance programs. Health Educ Q. 1982 Spring;9(1):42–54. doi: 10.1177/109019818200900103. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  16. Winickoff R. N., Barnett G. O., Morgan M., Coltin K. L. Quality assurance in a prepaid group practice. J Ambul Care Manage. 1979 Aug;2(3):19–28. doi: 10.1097/00004479-197908000-00004. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  17. Winickoff R. N., Coltin K. L., Morgan M. M., Buxbaum R. C., Barnett G. O. Improving physician performance through peer comparison feedback. Med Care. 1984 Jun;22(6):527–534. doi: 10.1097/00005650-198406000-00003. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from American Journal of Public Health are provided here courtesy of American Public Health Association

RESOURCES