In August, a group of impressive orthopaedic experts crafted a meticulous recommendation in response to the Comprehensive Care for Joint Replacement (CCJR) Payment Model at the Patient Reported Outcomes Summit for Total Joint Arthroplasty in Baltimore, Maryland.
Over the last ten years we have facilitated hundreds of conversations focused on defining a patient reported outcome data set. Two of the most important factors to consider are
- Number of questions you ask a patient. Survey duration will impact lasting and meaningful patience compliance.
- Specific outcome tools to use. Selecting the right outcome tools ensures the data will have value for the highest number of stakeholders including the patient, the surgeon, the hospital and the payer.
With this in mind, Ortech fully supports the recommendation of AHHKS and several other orthopaedic societies, as they are providing much needed guidance on what information to collect for total joint replacements. We also applaud the thought put into survey duration. As a provider of national and statewide orthopaedic registries, their recommendations are consistent with our experience in capturing data that drives clinical decisions.
We encourage CCJR to adopt these recommended measures. Consistency across orthopaedic patient-reported outcomes will reveal best practices for the orthopaedic community. We also believe the focused and clearly defined PRO data set will lead to maximum participation.
Dipping the Toe in the Water of Data Collection
Because our vision is to help orthopaedic surgeons become evidence based, we’ve created a new product offering with a customized dataset that addresses these requirements directly, using the PRO data set endorsed in the letter.
Here’s why we’re excited about this – in implementing a data-capture system, the question “what should we measure?” can bring progress to a halt. Quite frankly, we’ve seen it happen.
By choosing the metrics outlined in the letter, it’s possible to emphasize compliance as the primary goal of a complete data-capture system. As a result, gaining consensus across surgeons and administrators is easier, and it’s possible to operationalize a system within three weeks of contract approval, instead of 12 or more.
The good news is you can begin building a body of data – and data can begin to support clinical decisions sooner.
We look at this as an opportunity to make policy work in favor of the clinician.
You can learn more about our patient-reported outcomes platform, phiDB lite, that can have you up and running within two weeks or contact us here with your questions.
