Clinical Peer Review Program Self-Evaluation for US Hospitals

Prior research has shown wide variation in clinical peer review program structure, process, governance and perceived effectiveness. This study sought to validate the utility o f a Peer Review Program Self-Evaluation Tool as a potential guide to physician and hospital leaders seeking greater program value. Data from 330 hospitals show that the Total Score from the Self-Evaluation Tool is strongly associated with perceived quality impact. Organizational culture also plays a significant role. When controlling for these factors, there was no evidence of benefit from a multi-specialty review process. Physicians do not generally use reliable methods to measure clinical performance. A high rate of change since 2007 has not produced much improvement. The Peer Review Program Self-Evaluation Tool reliably differentiates hospitals along a continuum of perceived program performance. The full potential of peer review as a process for improving the quality and safety of care has yet to be realized