Physician performance and peer comparison feedback can affect physician care quality and patient outcomes. This study aimed to understand family physician perspectives of the value of performance feedback in quality improvement (QI) activities. This study analyzed American Board of Family Medicine open-ended survey data collected between 2004 and 2014 from physicians who completed a QI module that provided pre- and post-QI project individual performance data and peer comparisons. Physicians made 3480 comments in response to a question about this performance feedback, which were generally positive in nature (86%). Main themes that emerged were importance of accurate feedback data, enhanced detail in the content of feedback, and ability to customize peer comparison groups to compare performance to peers with similar patient populations or practice characteristics. Meaningful and tailored performance feedback may be an important tool for physicians to improve their care quality and should be considered an integral part of QI project design.
OxmanADThomsonMADavisDAHaynesRB. No magic bullets: a systematic review of 102 trials of interventions to improve professional practice. CMAJ. 1995;153:1423-1431.
2.
GrimshawJMShirranLThomasRet al. Changing provider behavior: an overview of systematic reviews of interventions. Med Care. 2001;8(suppl 2):II2-II45.
3.
McNamaraPShallerDDe La MareDIversN. Confidential Physician Feedback Reports: Designing for Optimal Impact on Performance (AHRQ Publ No. 16-0017-EF). Rockville, MD: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality; 2016.
4.
NavatheASEmanuelEJ. Physician peer comparisons as a nonfinancial strategy to improve the value of care. JAMA. 2016;316:1759-1760.
5.
ShallerDKanouseD. Private “Performance Feedback” Reporting for Physicians: Guidance for Community Quality Collaboratives (AHRQ Publ No. 13-0004). Rockville, MD: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality; 2012.
TelekiSSShawRDambergCLMcGlynnEA. Providing Performance Feedback to Individual Physicians: Current Practice and Emerging Lessons. Santa Monica, CA: RAND Corporation; 2006.
8.
GrolR.Changing physicians’ competence and performance: finding the balance between the individual and the organization. J Contin Educ Health Prof. 2002;22:244-251.
9.
BartonMBSchoenbaumSC. Improving influenza vaccination performance in an HMO setting: the use of computer-generated reminders and peer comparison feedback. Am J Public Health. 1990;80:534-536.
10.
HempelDPivettaEKimberlyHH. Personalized peer-comparison feedback and its effect on emergency medicine resident ultrasound scan numbers. Crit Ultrasound J. 2014;6:1. doi:10.1186/2036-7902-6-1.
11.
KiefeCIAllisonJJWilliamsODPersonSDWeaverMTWeissmanNW. Improving quality improvement using achievable benchmarks for physician feedback: a randomized controlled trial. JAMA. 2001;285:2871-2879.
12.
WinickoffRNColtinKLMorganMMBuxbaumRCBarnettGO. Improving physician performance through peer comparison feedback. Med Care. 1984;22:527-534.
13.
VeloskiJBoexJRGrasbergerMJEvansAWolfsonDB. Systematic review of the literature on assessment, feedback and physicians’ clinical performance: BEME Guide No. 7. Med Teach. 2006;28:117-128.
14.
IversNJamtvedtGFlottorpSet al. Audit and feedback: effects on professional practice and healthcare outcomes. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2012;(6):CD000259.
BalasEABorenSABrownGDEwigmanBGMitchellJAPerkoffGT. Effect of physician profiling on utilization. J Gen Intern Med. 1996;11:584-590.
17.
HillmanALRipleyKGoldfarbNWeinarJNuamahILuskE. The use of physician financial incentives and feedback to improve pediatric preventive care in Medicaid managed care. Pediatrics. 1999;104:931-935.
18.
ParrinoTA.The nonvalue of retrospective peer comparison feedback in containing hospital antibiotic costs. Am J Med. 1989;86:442-448.
19.
van der VeerSNde KeizerNFRavelliACTenkinkSJagerKJ. Improving quality of care. A systematic review on how medical registries provide information feedback to health care providers. Int J Med Inform. 2010;79:305-323.
20.
IversNMTuKYoungJet al. Feedback GAP: pragmatic, cluster-randomized trial of goal setting and action plans to increase the effectiveness of audit and feedback interventions in primary care. Implement Sci. 2013;8(1):142.
21.
IversNMSalesAColquhounHet al. No more “business as usual” with audit and feedback interventions: towards an agenda for a reinvigorated intervention. Implement Sci. 2014;9(1):14.
22.
FoyREcclesMJamtvedtGYoungJGrimshawJMRichardB. What do we know about how to do audit and feedback? Pitfalls in applying evidence from a systematic review. BMC Health Serv Res. 2005;5(1):50.
23.
PufferJCBazemoreAWPhillipsRLBeebeD. Certification status of family physicians in the initial cohort entering maintenance of certification. J Am Board Fam Med. 2014;27:581-582.
24.
PhillipsRLBlackburnBPetersonLEPufferJC. Maintenance of certification, Medicare quality reporting, and quality of diabetes care. Am J Med Qual. 2016;31:217-223.
25.
PetersonLEBlackburnBPufferJCPhilipsRL. Family physicians’ quality interventions and performance improvement for hypertension through maintenance of certification. J Healthc Qual. 2016;38:175-186.
26.
HysongSJ.Meta-analysis: audit & feedback features impact effectiveness on care quality. Med Care. 2009;47:356-363.
27.
PetersonLEBlackburnBEPufferJCPhillipsRLJr.Family physicians’ quality interventions and performance improvement through the ABFM diabetes performance in practice module. Ann Fam Med. 2014;12:17-20.
28.
WagnerEHAustinBTVon KorffM. Organizing care for patients with chronic illness. Milbank Q. 1996;74:511-544.
29.
StratmanEJMillerSJ. Assessment of the focused practice improvement module pilot program of the American Board of Dermatology for meeting requirements of maintenance of certification. JAMA Dermatol. 2017;153:715-716.
30.
WigginsREJrEtzR. Assessment of the American Board of Ophthalmology’s maintenance of certification part 4 (improvement in medical practice). JAMA Ophthalmol. 2016;134:967-974.
31.
DuffyFDLynnLADiduraHet al. Self-assessment of practice performance: development of the ABIM practice improvement module (PIM). J Contin Educ Health Prof. 2008;28:38-46.
32.
ArvanitisMdeJongNALeslieLKDeWaltDARandolphGDFlowerKB. Pediatrician maintenance of certification using American Board of Pediatrics’ performance improvement modules. Acad Pediatr. 2017;17:550-561.
33.
HysongSJBestRGPughJA. Audit and feedback and clinical practice guideline adherence: making feedback actionable. Implement Sci. 2006;1(1):9.
34.
FrenzelJCKeeSSEnsorJERiedelBJRuizJR. Ongoing provision of individual clinician performance data improves practice behavior. Anesth Analg. 2010;111:515-519.
35.
PhillipsRKennedyJJaénCKeithSPufferJ. Transforming physician certification to support physician self-motivation and capacity to improve quality and safety. J Enterp Transform. 2016;6:162-169.
36.
PetersonLEEdenARCochraneAHagenMD. Physician satisfaction with and practice changes resulting from American Board of Family Medicine maintenance of certification performance in practice modules. J Contin Educ Health Prof. 2016;36:55-60.
37.
HagenMD.Improving performance improvement. Ann Fam Med. 2017;15:287-288.
