There is consensus among experts regarding some indicators of sleep quality among otherwise healthy individuals. Education and public health initiatives regarding good sleep quality will require sustained and collaborative efforts from multiple stakeholders. Future research should explore how sleep architecture and naps relate to sleep quality. Implications and limitations of the consensus recommendations are discussed.

Evidence is scant, particularly about individual providers and practices. Rigorous evaluation of many major public reporting systems is lacking. Evidence suggests that publicly releasing performance data stimulates quality improvement activity at the hospital level. The effect of public reporting on effectiveness, safety, and patient-centeredness remains uncertain.

The quality of care, measured according to whether patients were offered recommended services, increases as a patient's number of chronic conditions increases.

Background Patient-reported measures include preferences and reports about care received, health behaviors, and outcomes of care (patient satisfaction and health-related quality of life). These measures are a core aspect of health care, but there is much to be learned about how to use them to improve clinical practice. Method We specify linkages among different patient-reported measures and focus upon the prospects and challenges for use of patient-reported outcomes in clinical practice. Results Patient-reported measures are important throughout the continuum of patient care. At the initial visit, patient-reported outcomes provide information about what is important to the patient, the patient's current behaviors, and the patient's baseline health-related quality of life. At subsequent visits, patient-reported outcomes help evaluate disease progression or regression as well as treatment effects. Conclusions Patient-reported measures can help clinicians target interventions that will improve patient outcomes of care. However, there are a number of challenges in using patient-reported outcomes in clinical practice.

We propose a management guideline based on a patient's risk-very low, low, moderate, and high-for clinicians to use when delineating those patients who should undergo RAI treatment for initial postoperative management of DTC. A majority of very low-risk and low-risk patients, as well as select cases of patients with moderate risk do not demonstrate survival or disease-free survival benefit from postoperative RAI treatment, and therefore we recommend against postoperative RAI in these cases.

These participants showed a strong preference for physicians of high technical quality when forced to make tradeoffs, but a substantial proportion of the sample preferred physicians of high interpersonal quality. Individual physician report cards should contain ample information in both domains to be most useful to patients.

Among older persons at increased risk of death or functional decline, multimorbidity results in better, rather than worse, quality of care.

OBJECTIVES To test a new cognitive behavioral therapy for insomnia (CBT-I) program designed for use by nonclinicians. DESIGN Randomized controlled trial. SETTING Department of Veterans Affairs healthcare system. PARTICIPANTS Community-dwelling veterans aged 60 and older who met diagnostic criteria for insomnia of 3 months duration or longer (N = 159). INTERVENTION Nonclinician “sleep coaches” delivered a five-session manual-based CBT-I program including stimulus control, sleep restriction, sleep hygiene, and cognitive therapy (individually or in small groups), with weekly telephone behavioral sleep medicine supervision. Controls received five sessions of general sleep education. MEASUREMENTS Primary outcomes, including self-reported (7-day sleep diary) sleep onset latency (SOL-D), wake after sleep onset (WASO-D), total wake time (TWT-D), and sleep efficiency (SE-D); Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI); and objective sleep efficiency (7-day wrist actigraphy, SE-A) were measured at baseline, at the posttreatment assessment, and at 6- and 12-month follow-up. Additional measures included the Insomnia Severity Index (ISI), depressive symptoms (Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9)), and quality of life (Medical Outcomes Study 12-item Short-form Survey version 2 (SF-12v2)). RESULTS Intervention subjects had greater improvement than controls between the baseline and posttreatment assessments, the baseline and 6-month assessments, and the baseline and 12-month assessments in SOL-D (−23.4, −15.8, and −17.3 minutes, respectively), TWT-D (−68.4, −37.0, and −30.9 minutes, respectively), SE-D (10.5%, 6.7%, and 5.4%, respectively), PSQI (−3.4, −2.4, and −2.1 in total score, respectively), and ISI (−4.5, −3.9, and −2.8 in total score, respectively) (all P < .05). There were no significant differences in SE-A, PHQ-9, or SF-12v2. CONCLUSION Manual-based CBT-I delivered by nonclinician sleep coaches improves sleep in older adults with chronic insomnia.