Is There a Relationship Between Facility Peer Review Findings and Quality in the Veterans Health Administration?

Abstract

Background: The aim of clinical peer review (PR) is to improve facility health care quality. However, prior authors have shown that PR may be biased, have rater reliability concerns, or be used for punitive reasons. It is important to determine whether facility PR processes are related to objective facility quality of care.

Methods: We collected proportion of PR findings that "most experienced and competent clinicians may have managed the case differently" or "most experienced and competent clinicians would have managed the case differently" as an objective measure of facility PR processes and outcomes. We correlated these with facility quality metrics for 2019.

Results: PR findings were not associated with facility quality metrics but were strongly associated with previous year findings.

Conclusions: This study describes a potentially new source of bias in PR and demonstrates that objective facility outcomes are not related to individual PR findings.