Quality Measures Addressing Disparities to Improve Outcomes in Hand Surgery.

BACKGROUND: There is growing evidence that social determinants of health (SDOH) are associated with disparities in access to care and hand and upper extremity health. Quality measures represent an opportunity to evaluate disparities in access and outcomes that can inform improvement interventions. We performed a systematic review of evidence regarding health disparities within hand surgery and aimed to develop suitable quality measures that are clinically important, feasible, usable, and scientifically acceptable.

METHODS: We performed a systematic review including common hand surgery terms to identify health disparities in hand surgery related to SDOH. Candidate quality measures were constructed based upon evidence from the systematic review. A consortium of 11 US-based hand and upper extremity surgeons completed a modified RAND/UCLA Delphi Appropriateness process to evaluate the importance, feasibility, usability, and scientific acceptability of the candidate quality measures. Panelists rated each measure on a scale of 1 (definitely not important/feasible/usable/scientifically acceptable) to 9 (definitely important/feasible/usable/scientifically acceptable) in 2 voting rounds separated by a face-to-face discussion. Agreement among panelists and validity were assessed using predetermined criteria.

RESULTS: Fourteen candidate quality measures addressing health disparities were identified based on evidence from the systematic review, including time to surgery and emergency department use after hand surgery based on insurance type, clinical outcomes based on social deprivation, among others. All 14 measures were accepted.

CONCLUSIONS: Fourteen candidate quality measures were identified and accepted based upon consensus to address health disparities in hand surgery, although future investigation will be needed to evaluate their effectiveness.