Skip to main content

Table 1 Key performance indicators for musculoskeletal centralized intake

From: Development of key performance indicators to evaluate centralized intake for patients with osteoarthritis and rheumatoid arthritis

Key performance indicator Dimension of quality of care Derived from existing measure Included or removed after round 2
1. Time from osteoarthritis referral receipt to referral completion for initially incomplete referrals Accessibility, efficiency New KPI Included
2. Time from rheumatoid arthritis referral receipt to referral completion for initially incomplete referrals Accessibility, efficiency New KPI Included
3. Percentage of osteoarthritis referrals received with complete information Efficiency Hip and Knee Replacement Measurement Frameworka,b Included
4. Percentage of rheumatoid arthritis referrals received with complete information Efficiency New KPI Included
5. Time from receipt of complete osteoarthritis referral to musculoskeletal appointment Accessibility Hip and Knee Replacement Measurement Frameworka,b Included
6. Waiting times for rheumatologist consultation for patients with new-onset rheumatoid arthritis Accessibility AAC Performance measures for IAc Included
7. Time to disease-modifying antirheumatic drug therapy for patients with new-onset rheumatoid arthritis Accessibility, effectiveness AAC Performance measures for IAc Included
8. Percentage of patients with new-onset rheumatoid arthritis with at least one visit to a rheumatologist in the first year of diagnosis Accessibility AAC Performance measures for IAc Included
9. Orthopaedic surgeons per 100,000 population Accessibility COAd,e, AAOSf, ACREUe,g Removed
10. Rheumatologists per 100,000 population Accessibility AAC Performance measures for IAc Included
11. Percentage of patients that receive information regarding resources and tools available for management while waiting for first musculoskeletal specialty contact Appropriateness Hip and Knee Replacement Measurement Frameworka,b Included
12. Percentage of osteoarthritis referrals scored using Western Canada Waiting List priority referral criteriah Appropriateness New KPI Included
13. Distribution of osteoarthritis referrals in each urgency category (as scored using the Western Canada Waiting List referral tool) Appropriateness New KPI Included
14. Percentage of osteoarthritis referrals triaged as highest urgency based on high Western Canada Waiting List priority criteria scores seen within Wait Time Alliance benchmarks Appropriateness New KPI Included
15. Percentage of rheumatoid arthritis referrals assessed using a priority tool Appropriateness New KPI Removed
16. Percentage of rheumatoid arthritis referrals categorized as early rheumatoid arthritis Appropriateness New KPI Removed
17. Waiting times for patients with established rheumatoid arthritis Accessibility New KPI Included
18. Percentage of rheumatoid arthritis patients treated with a disease-modifying antirheumatic drug during the measurement year Effectiveness, accessibility AAC Performance measures for IAc Included
19. Percentage of referrals rejected or redirected when received at centralized intake Appropriateness New KPI Included
20. Percentage of musculoskeletal appointments completed as scheduled Efficiency Hip and Knee Replacement Measurement Frameworka,b Included
21. Percentage of specialist providers participating in centralized intake Efficiency New KPI Included
22. Number of referrals received through centralized intake Efficiency New KPI Included
23. Patient experience with centralized intake Acceptability AHRQi, NHSj, and Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care (Ontario)k Included
24. Referring clinician experience with centralized intake Acceptability The Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care (Ontario)k Included
25. Musculoskeletal specialty care provider experience with centralized intake Acceptability The Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care (Ontario)k Included
26. Ratio of patient flow to estimated clinic capacity of osteoarthritis teams participating in centralized intake Efficiency, accessibility Developed during round 2 N/A
27. Operating room time for arthroplasty surgeons in Alberta Accessibility Developed during round 2 N/A
28. Ratio of patient flow to clinic capacity of rheumatoid arthritis teams participating in centralized intake Efficiency, accessibility Developed during round 2 N/A
29. Administrative staff and allied health professional experience with centralized intake Acceptability Developed during round 2 N/A
30. Agreement of centralized intake suspected diagnosis of severe osteoarthritis cases (e.g., patients who are candidates for hip or knee joint replacements) versus confirmed diagnosis of severe osteoarthritis Appropriateness, effectiveness Developed during round 2 N/A
31. Agreement of centralized intake suspected diagnosis versus confirmed diagnosis for rheumatoid arthritis Appropriateness, effectiveness Developed during round 2 N/A
   Total number of candidate KPIs before round 2: 25 Total number of candidate KPIs after round 2: 28
  1. AAC Arthritis Alliance of Canada, IA Inflammatory Arthritis, AAOS American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons, ACREU Arthritis Community Research and Evaluation Unit, AHRQ Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, COA, Canadian Orthopaedic Association, NHS, National Health Service
  2. aFrank et al. [27]
  3. bMarshall et al. [39]
  4. cBarber et al. [26]
  5. dRumble and Kreder [40]
  6. eBadley et al. [17]
  7. fNatividad [41]
  8. gCanizares et al. [42]
  9. hThe Western Canada Waiting List (WCWL) Project has developed and validated a hip and knee replacement priority criteria tool to assess clinical urgency for hip and knee joint replacements in a standardized and reliable manner [43]. The hip and knee replacement priority criteria tool is a clinician-scored tool consisting of seven items: (1) pain on motion, (2) pain at rest, (3) ability to walk, (4) other functional limitations, (5) abnormal findings, (6) potential for progression of disease and (7) ability to work, give care to dependents and live independently. The urgency is determined through a point count scoring system and could be used to structure and manage waiting lists for hip and knee joint replacements [44]
  10. iCamacho et al. [45]
  11. jClinical Indicators Team [46]
  12. kDeloitte & Touche LLP and affiliated entities [47]