 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
Jenny Chatman, PhD - Paul J. Cortese Distinguished Professor of Management; and Director, Haas School, PhD Program, UC Berkeley
February 3, 2004
Judith Hibbard, PhD - Professor, Department of Planning, Public Policy & Management, University of Oregon
February 17, 2004
In this talk, the public reporting of health care quality information is placed within a larger policy context and key barriers to successful implementation are elaborated. The findings from a series of studies that examine the question of "how to make public performance reporting more effective" are presented. Beginning with controlled laboratory and ending with a large demonstration evaluation, the studies look at the impact of public reporting on both consumers and providers.
Stephen M. Shortell, PhD - Dean, School of Public Health, UC Berkeley
March 2, 2004
Using data from both a national survey and a quasi-experimental intervention, Dr. Shrotell will present findings on where the real payoff may lie in improving care for the chronically ill. He will also discuss the implications for policy and practice.
John Hsu, MD, MBA, MSCE - Research Scientist, Kaiser Permanente Division of Research, Oakland
March 16, 2004
Copayments are a commonly used patient-level incentive for modulating the demand for health services. Prior studies have demonstrated that copayments and other forms of cost sharing lead to decreased utilization, but none have had sufficient sample sizes to evaluate effects on patient outcomes. We evaluated the effects of the size of a copayment for emergency department (ED) use on patient outcomes within the Kaiser Permanente-Northern California (KP) integrated delivery system, using a quasi-experimental design with concurrent controls. The issue of the safety of copayments is of tremendous and increasing importance as the use of financial incentives becomes more common, and concerns about patient safety and choice increase among patients, providers, and policy makers.
Hal Luft, MD, MBA, MSCE - Caldwell B. Esselstyn Professor of Health Policy and Health Economics; and Director, the Institute for Health Policy Studies, UC San Francisco
April 6, 2004
When people have choices among various health plans, it is unlikely that the health status of enrollees in the various plans will be equal, nor would we necessarily want it to be equal if some plans are better at treating certain types of patients. There are various ways in which such selection might occur, and these will have different effects on the mix of enrollees even if the overall risk levels are the same. How might these differences be assessed if we assume that selection is biased, rather than random, and how might this non-random selection be offset?
James Robinson, PhD - Professor, School of Public Health, UC Berkeley
Diane Rittenhouse, MD, MPH - Post-doctoral Research Fellow, Department of Family & Community Medicine and the Institute for Health Policy Studies, UC San Francisco
April 20, 2004
Drs. Rittenhouse and Robinson present results from a study on the physician networks that serve the Medicaid HMO plans in California. Dr. Robinson will be emphasizing the economic issues facing these organizations, while Dr. Rittenhouse will discuss the quality of care issues.
Meg Chren, MBA, MPH, PhD - Associate Professor in Residence, UC San Francisco; and Director; Health Services Research Enhancement Award Program, San Francisco Veterans Affairs Medical Center
May 4, 2004
Nonmelanoma skin cancer is by far the most common malignancy. Multiple therapies prevent recurrence, but vary widely in cost. As with other non-fatal cancers, comprehensive outcomes (such as quality of life) are important for determining quality of care. Dr. Chren's team has assembled a cohort of 1375 consecutive patients with nonmelanoma skin cancers diagnosed over two years at a VA and a private site, and has detailed data about patients and tumors before therapy and at two years after therapy. They have documented that (1) even after controlling for clinical variables, tumors were treated with different therapies at the two sites, and (2) quality-of-life outcomes were different among treatments at two years. This study illustrates unexplained variation in care in different practices settings, and the use of high-fidelity longitudinal data to examine outcomes of this care for a highly prevalent condition.
© 2005 UC Regents. All rights reserved.
