Thank you in advance for your input on the indicators to be included in Data to Decisions 2.0!
We would like to finalize the list early in the new year to give everyone as much time as possible to get the data and pull the report together. To that end, please complete the survey by Jan 23rd , 2015. Click here if you would like to view the data dictionary for each of the indicators.
The short list of indicators for D2D 2.0 is based on input from an advisory panel of clinicians and EDs, the QIDSS host ED forum, Patients Canada and consultation with members regarding the new Ministry contract as well as ongoing informal input from members before, during and after the release of D2D 1.0 in a variety of forums. The list is also heavily influenced by the recent work to prioritize the long list (ie 200+) of indicators in the PCPMF . The criteria for selecting indicators that emerged from this input is as follows:
• Be part of D2D 1.0 unless there is a clear indication against including them again
• Address a clear and important-to-members gap among D2D 1.0 indicators
• Be possible for majority of AFHTO members to access data with reasonable effort
• Align as much as possible with sector wide reporting processes/capacity (ie to facilitate inter-model comparisons)
• Be among the top-weighted indicators in the Starfield Primary Care Index (to extend capacity to measure quality of comprehensive, patient-centered care aligned with patient expectations)
To that end, there are 3 groups of indicators for you to consider.
1) Existing D2D 1.0 indicators: All of the D2D 1.0 indicators will be retained in 2.0 unless there is clear evidence that it is not possible for a large proportion of AFHTO members to do so in a consistent way. The definitions and data capture processes for some indicators have been modified to address concerns raised about feasibility and data quality in the D2D 1.0 process.
2) Potential additions for D2D 2.0: Several indicators are proposed to fill perceived gaps in coverage in D2D 1.0. The specific rationale for each indicator is provided in the survey materials. Only a small number of candidates are offered for input, given the very clear guidance against having large numbers of indicators.
3) Context indicators: In addition to the “peer group” characteristics included in D2D 1.0 (ie roster size, rurality and EMR access to hospital discharge data), several other indicators (eg teaching status) are proposed to make it more meaningful for teams to compare to peers.
More information can be found on the members-only page of the AFHTO web site (first log on the members-only page of the AFHTO web site click here ): See survey instructions and data dictionary .
Thanks for your time and consideration. Please contact Carol Mulder (carol.mulder@afhto.ca) with any questions or suggestions on this.
<