Skip to main content
. 2010 Nov 23;26(5):467–473. doi: 10.1007/s11606-010-1572-x

Table 2.

Descriptive Statistics for Each Performance Measure and Computation of the Standard for Minimally-Acceptable Performance

Measure Physician performance mean (SD)* Threshold Points Threshold X points
Process measures
 Retinal exam 0.63 (0.29) 0.288 9 2.59
 Nephropathy assessment 0.92 (0.12) 0.731 10 7.31
 Foot exam 0.69 (0.33) 0.356 4 1.42
 Smoking status & cessation advice / treatment 0.97 (0.07) 0.675 7 4.73
 
Intermediate Outcome Measures
 Not A1C poor control § 0.84 (0.18) 0.725 10 7.25
 A1C at goal 0.61 (0.20) 0.360 7 2.52
 Not blood pressure poor control § 0.74 (0.16) 0.537 10 5.37
 Blood pressure superior control 0.39 (0.17) 0.169 9 1.52
 Not LDL poor control § 0.75 (0.19) 0.587 10 5.87
 LDL superior control 0.54 (0.20) 0.238 8 1.91
 
Patient Experience Measures
 Overall diabetes care satisfaction 0.75 (0.16) 0.463 7 3.24
 Patient self-care support 0.79 (0.12) 0.531 9 4.78
 
 Standard Sum = 48.51

A1C, Hemoglobin A1C; LDL, Low-density Lipoprotein.

* The physician performance mean is the average proportion of patients meeting the measure across the sample of 957 physicians.

Threshold is the minimally-acceptable performance rate determined by the panel via the standard-setting exercise.

For all process measures, a physician must earn at least the threshold to be awarded any points.

§ For the Poor Control measures, points were awarded to physicians when their patients did not meet the performance level noted in Table 1. For example, if 80% of a physician’s patients did not have poor control of their blood pressure, then the physician would earn 8 points for that measure (0.80 × 10 = 8).

See footnote under Table 1 for a description of the A1C at goal measure and the patient experience measures.

Points were determined using the Dunn–Rankin method, which required panelists to independently rate each measure’s importance for delivering a minimally-acceptable level of diabetes care.