The urgent need to improve health care quality. Institute of Medicine National Roundtable on Health Care Quality.

OBJECTIVE To identify issues related to the quality of health care in the United States, including its measurement, assessment, and improvement, requiring action by health care professionals or other constituencies in the public or private sectors. PARTICIPANTS The National Roundtable on Health Care Quality, convened by the Institute of Medicine, a component of the National Academy of Sciences, comprised 20 representatives of the private and public sectors, practicing medicine and nursing, representing academia, business, consumer advocacy, and the health media, and including the heads of federal health programs. The roundtable met 6 times between February 1996 and January 1998. It explored ongoing, rapid changes in health care and the implications of these changes for the quality of health and health care in the United States. EVIDENCE Roundtable members held discussions with a wide variety of experts, convened conferences, commissioned papers, and drew on their individual professional experience. CONSENSUS PROCESS At the end of its deliberations, roundtable members reached consensus on the conclusions described in this article by a series of discussions at committee meetings and reviews of successive draft documents, the first of which was created by the listed authors and the Institute of Medicine project director. The drafts were revised following these discussions, and the final document was approved according to the formal report review procedures of the National Research Council of the National Academy of Sciences. CONCLUSIONS The quality of health care can be precisely defined and measured with a degree of scientific accuracy comparable with that of most measures used in clinical medicine. Serious and widespread quality problems exist throughout American medicine. These problems, which may be classified as underuse, overuse, or misuse, occur in small and large communities alike, in all parts of the country, and with approximately equal frequency in managed care and fee-for-service systems of care. Very large numbers of Americans are harmed as a direct result. Quality of care is the problem, not managed care. Current efforts to improve will not succeed unless we undertake a major, systematic effort to overhaul how we deliver health care services, educate and train clinicians, and assess and improve quality.

[1]  J. Eisenberg Agency for Health Care Policy and Research. , 1999, Medical care.

[2]  J. Sisk Increased competition and the quality of health care. , 1998, The Milbank quarterly.

[3]  D Blumenthal,et al.  A report card on continuous quality improvement. , 1998, The Milbank quarterly.

[4]  S. Shortell,et al.  Assessing the impact of continuous quality improvement on clinical practice: what it will take to accelerate progress. , 1998, The Milbank quarterly.

[5]  J F Steiner,et al.  Antibiotic prescribing for children with colds, upper respiratory tract infections, and bronchitis. , 1998, JAMA.

[6]  T. Clemmer,et al.  A computer-assisted management program for antibiotics and other antiinfective agents. , 1998, The New England journal of medicine.

[7]  J. Coben,et al.  Incidence of dog bite injuries treated in emergency departments. , 1998, JAMA.

[8]  R H Brook,et al.  Managed care is not the problem, quality is. , 1997, JAMA.

[9]  D. Longo,et al.  Consumer reports in health care. Do they make a difference in patient care? , 1997, JAMA.

[10]  J. Steiner,et al.  Antibiotic prescribing for adults with colds, upper respiratory tract infections, and bronchitis by ambulatory care physicians. , 1997, JAMA.

[11]  M. Chassin Assessing Strategics For Quality Improvement , 1997 .

[12]  Jean-Jacques Mourad,et al.  Événements indésirables liés à la sous-utilisation des bêtabloquants chez les sujets âgés survivants d'un infarctus du myocarde , 1997 .

[13]  D. Bates,et al.  The Costs of Adverse Drug Events in Hospitalized Patients , 1997 .

[14]  David W. Bates,et al.  The costs of adverse drug events in hospitalized patients. Adverse Drug Events Prevention Study Group , 1997 .

[15]  David Classen,et al.  Implementing Antibiotic Practice Guidelines through Computer-Assisted Decision Support: Clinical and Financial Outcomes , 1996, Annals of Internal Medicine.

[16]  Russell L. Stogsdill,et al.  A regional intervention to improve the hospital mortality associated with coronary artery bypass graft surgery. The Northern New England Cardiovascular Disease Study Group. , 1996, JAMA.

[17]  E L Hannan,et al.  Benefits and hazards of reporting medical outcomes publicly. , 1996, The New England journal of medicine.

[18]  N. Laird,et al.  Incidence of adverse drug events and potential adverse drug events , 1995 .

[19]  P. Sorlie,et al.  Mortality in the uninsured compared with that in persons with public and private health insurance. , 1994, Archives of internal medicine.

[20]  R. Brook,et al.  The medical appropriateness of tympanostomy tubes proposed for children younger than 16 years in the United States. , 1994, JAMA.

[21]  E L Hannan,et al.  Improving the outcomes of coronary artery bypass surgery in New York State. , 1994, JAMA.

[22]  M. Gold,et al.  Health insurance and subjective health status: data from the 1987 National Medical Expenditure survey. , 1993, American journal of public health.

[23]  M. Gold,et al.  Health Insurance and Mortality: Evidence From a National Cohort , 1993 .

[24]  L. Russell The role of prevention in health reform. , 1993, The New England journal of medicine.

[25]  E. McGlynn,et al.  The appropriateness of hysterectomy. A comparison of care in seven health plans. Health Maintenance Organization Quality of Care Consortium. , 1993, JAMA.

[26]  R. Phillips,et al.  Comparison of the quality of ambulatory care for fee-for-service and prepaid patients. , 1991, Annals of internal medicine.

[27]  T. Brennan,et al.  INCIDENCE OF ADVERSE EVENTS AND NEGLIGENCE IN HOSPITALIZED PATIENTS , 2008 .

[28]  K N Lohr,et al.  Medicare: A Strategy for Quality Assurance , 1991, Journal of quality assurance : a publication of the National Association of Quality Assurance Professionals.

[29]  D Draper,et al.  Measuring quality of care with explicit process criteria before and after implementation of the DRG-based prospective payment system. , 1990, JAMA.

[30]  S Greenfield,et al.  Detection of depressive disorder for patients receiving prepaid or fee-for-service care. Results from the Medical Outcomes Study. , 1989, JAMA.

[31]  Gordon S. Smith,et al.  COST OF INJURY IN THE UNITED STATES: A REPORT TO CONGRESS , 1989 .

[32]  J H Siegel,et al.  The economic impact of traumatic injuries. One-year treatment-related expenditures. , 1988, JAMA.

[33]  A. Greenspon,et al.  Incidence of unwarranted implantation of permanent cardiac pacemakers in a large medical population. , 1988, The New England journal of medicine.

[34]  R H Brook,et al.  Does inappropriate use explain geographic variations in the use of health care services? A study of three procedures. , 1987, JAMA.

[35]  Louise B. Russell,et al.  Is Prevention Better Than Cure , 1987 .

[36]  W. Knaus,et al.  An evaluation of outcome from intensive care in major medical centers. , 1986, Annals of internal medicine.

[37]  N. Lurie,et al.  Termination from Medi-Cal--does it affect health? , 1984, The New England journal of medicine.

[38]  A. Flood,et al.  Does Practice Make Perfect?: Part II: The Relation Between Volume and and Outcomes and Other Hospital Characteristics , 1984, Medical care.

[39]  A. Flood,et al.  Does Practice Make Perfect?: Part I: The Relation Between Hospital Volume and Outcomes for Selected Diagnostic Categories , 1984, Medical care.

[40]  William E. Copeland,et al.  Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology , 1893, Texas medical journal.