Cover: RAND/UCLA Quality-of-Care Measures for Carpal Tunnel Syndrome

RAND/UCLA Quality-of-Care Measures for Carpal Tunnel Syndrome

Tools for Assessing Quality of Care and Appropriateness of Surgery

Published Aug 16, 2011

by Teryl K. Nuckols, Anne Reid Griffin, Steven M. Asch, Douglas Benner, Erika Bruce, Mary Cassidy, Walter T. Chang, Neil G. Harness, Liisa Hiatt, Charles K. Jablecki, et al.

Download eBook for Free

Full Document

Full Document PDF file does not include Appendixes

FormatFile SizeNotes
PDF file 0.2 MB

Use Adobe Acrobat Reader version 10 or higher for the best experience.

Summary Only

FormatFile SizeNotes
PDF file 0.1 MB

Use Adobe Acrobat Reader version 10 or higher for the best experience.

Appendix I

Quality Measures: Complete List of RAND/UCLA Quality Measures for Carpal Tunnel Syndrome

FormatFile SizeNotes
PDF file 0.2 MB

Use Adobe Acrobat Reader version 10 or higher for the best experience.

Appendix II

Quality Measures: Overview of Use

FormatFile SizeNotes
PDF file 0.1 MB

Use Adobe Acrobat Reader version 10 or higher for the best experience.

Appendix III

Quality Measures: Identifying Relevant Patients Using Administrative (Claims) Data

FormatFile SizeNotes
PDF file 0.1 MB

Use Adobe Acrobat Reader version 10 or higher for the best experience.

Appendix IV, Part A

Quality Measures: Materials for Scoring Main Set of Measures (Scoring Instructions)

FormatFile SizeNotes
PDF file 0.2 MB

Use Adobe Acrobat Reader version 10 or higher for the best experience.

Appendix IV, Part B

Quality Measures: Materials for Scoring Main Set of Measures (Guidance Document)

FormatFile SizeNotes
PDF file 9.9 MB

Use Adobe Acrobat Reader version 10 or higher for the best experience.

Appendix IV, Part C

Quality Measures: Materials for Scoring Main Set of Measures (Data Forms)

FormatFile SizeNotes
PDF file 0.2 MB

Use Adobe Acrobat Reader version 10 or higher for the best experience.

Appendix V, Part A

Materials for Scoring Electrodiagnosis Quality Measures (Scoring Instructions)

FormatFile SizeNotes
PDF file 0.1 MB

Use Adobe Acrobat Reader version 10 or higher for the best experience.

Appendix V, Part B

Materials for Scoring Electrodiagnosis Quality Measures (Guidance Document)

FormatFile SizeNotes
PDF file 0.1 MB

Use Adobe Acrobat Reader version 10 or higher for the best experience.

Appendix V, Part C

Materials for Scoring Electrodiagnosis Quality Measures (Data Forms)

FormatFile SizeNotes
PDF file 0.1 MB

Use Adobe Acrobat Reader version 10 or higher for the best experience.

Appendix VI, Part A

Materials for Scoring Intraoperative Measures (Scoring Instructions)

FormatFile SizeNotes
PDF file 0.1 MB

Use Adobe Acrobat Reader version 10 or higher for the best experience.

Appendix VI, Part B

Materials for Scoring Intraoperative Measures (Guidance Document)

FormatFile SizeNotes
PDF file 0.2 MB

Use Adobe Acrobat Reader version 10 or higher for the best experience.

Appendix VI, Part C

Materials for Scoring Intraoperative Measures (Data Forms)

FormatFile SizeNotes
PDF file 0.1 MB

Use Adobe Acrobat Reader version 10 or higher for the best experience.

Appendix VII

Quality Measures: Instructions for Analyzing Data

FormatFile SizeNotes
PDF file 0.2 MB

Use Adobe Acrobat Reader version 10 or higher for the best experience.

Appendix VIII

Algorithm: Determining the Appropriateness of Surgery for Carpal Tunnel Syndrome

FormatFile SizeNotes
PDF file 0.2 MB

Use Adobe Acrobat Reader version 10 or higher for the best experience.

Claims relating to carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS) are common in workers' compensation systems. Given that the human and economic costs related to CTS are considerable, healthcare organizations must be able to offer high-quality care to people affected by this condition. The study on which this report is based is a step toward improving care for CTS. It has produced two unique tools for institutions to use, one for assessing the quality of care received by a population of patients who have or may have CTS, and the other for identifying the appropriateness of surgery for individual patients. Tools that assist in measuring quality of care are fundamental to efforts to improve healthcare quality. Tools that assess the appropriateness of surgery ensure that people who need surgery receive it and, conversely, that people are not subjected to inappropriate operations. Applied in this way, these two tools are likely to improve clinical circumstances and economic outcomes for people with CTS. Together, they can be useful to provider organizations, medical groups, medical certification boards, and other associated decisionmakers attempting to assess, monitor, and provide appropriate care for people with CTS.

This research was jointly supported by the California Commission on Health and Safety and Workers' Compensation and by the Zenith Insurance Company, and was undertaken within the RAND Center for Health and Safety in the Workplace.

This report is part of the RAND technical report series. RAND technical reports may include research findings on a specific topic that is limited in scope or intended for a narrow audience; present discussions of the methodology employed in research; provide literature reviews, survey instruments, modeling exercises, guidelines for practitioners and research professionals, and supporting documentation; or deliver preliminary findings. All RAND reports undergo rigorous peer review to ensure that they meet high standards for research quality and objectivity.

This document and trademark(s) contained herein are protected by law. This representation of RAND intellectual property is provided for noncommercial use only. Unauthorized posting of this publication online is prohibited; linking directly to this product page is encouraged. Permission is required from RAND to reproduce, or reuse in another form, any of its research documents for commercial purposes. For information on reprint and reuse permissions, please visit www.rand.org/pubs/permissions.

RAND is a nonprofit institution that helps improve policy and decisionmaking through research and analysis. RAND's publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions of its research clients and sponsors.