evaluation
Assessing
performance
in pathways project
photo: istockphoto.com
A
t its most recent meeting, Council was updated on the progress
of an initiative that is evaluating the effectiveness of different
registration pathways and policies.
The project is exploring potential performance differences between physicians who
were registered through alternative registration pathways (ARPs) and those who were
registered through the traditional registration pathways (TRPs).
“This evaluation is important because we
want to ensure that alternative routes are
meeting their intended purpose,” said Mr.
Dan Faulkner, Deputy Registrar. “It will also
allow us to better understand the educational needs of different physician subgroups
to enable the development of appropriate
quality improvement activities,” he said.
In total, 783 ARP physicians are included in the evaluation, representing most
physicians who were registered through
an alternative pathway between 2000 and
2012. Each ARP physician is matched to
three TRP physicians based on demographic
and practice characteristics such as age, sex,
specialty, practice experience, and practice
location.
Physician performance is being assessed in
three ways:
• rospectively – through the Peer Assessment program
P
• Retrospectively – using the ICRC complaints database
• Collaboratively – with the Institute for Clinical
Evaluative Sciences (ICES)
“These three data sources will allow for a comprehensive assessment of physician performance,
and for a rigorous investigation of potential
differences between ARP physician and TRP
physicians,” said Mr. Faulkner.
The College’s collaboration with ICES will
involve an analysis of quality indicators available in ICES datasets (e.g., physician OHIP
billing practices and prescription rates). An
analysis of these indicators will help to determine if potential differences exist between
those who are registered through alternative pathways and those who are registered
through traditional pathways in areas directly
related to patient care.
“We want to ensure that
alternative routes are meeting
their intended purpose”
Throughout this project, the value of multisource feedback (MSF) is also being evaluated for potential incorporation into College
assessment programs. So far, feedback from
physicians about the use of MSF has been
largely positive, said Mr. Faulkner.
Of the 526 physicians assessed to date, 77%
of physicians either agreed or strongly agreed
that the MSF was useful for their continuing professional development and 71% of
physicians either agreed or strongly agreed
that the MSF was useful for initiating practice
improvement.
Issue 4, 2014 Dialogue
55