Every system is perfectly designed to get the results it gets." 1 Health care quality measurement has become important for evaluating hospitals, practices, and individual clinicians. Unfortunately, our current quality measurement system is designed to reward those who do more even when doing more may not benefit, and may even harm, patients. Today, medical care is scrutinized through the lens of quality improvement and measurement, with patient experience being a key component of health care assessment. With medical overuse being described as a serious and extensive quality problem in US health care, 2 the current system will need to be redesigned for clinicians to effectively minimize unnecessary testing and treatments and, in short, champion medical stewardship. Despite efforts of campaigns and the dissemination of evidence-based guidelines to reduce the wasteful and unsustainable use of medical resources, pediatric patients continue to receive low-value care. 3 Here, we propose that 2 of the main vehicles for quality measurement do not currently align well with the intent of medical stewardship: quality measures and patient satisfaction scores.
THE LACK OF OVERUSE QUALITY MEASURESPresent-day measures tend to favor assessments of underuse rather than overuse. As an example, .75% of the currently used quality process measures in pediatrics are used to target the underuse of health care services, such as documenting hydration status in gastroenteritis, obtaining a blood culture in patients with community-acquired pneumonia, and performing hearing testing for patients with otitis media with effusion. 4 The implementation of overuse measures, such as the administration of albuterol and/or steroids in bronchiolitis and appropriate testing for children with pharyngitis, is more challenging than that of underuse measures. Improving the adoption of a recommended test or intervention may be easier to conceptualize, accept, and measure. Deimplementation, or forgoing a test or intervention that evidence suggests should not happen, is more difficult to achieve. 5 When a patient receives a low-value test, even 1 that ultimately results in downstream harm, we do not typically view it as low-value care. In addition, many tests and interventions seen as the standard of care and subsequently proven to be of low value may be particularly challenging to deimplement. 6 For example, despite a randomized controlled trial from 2007 7 revealing no benefit of steroids for moderate-to-severe bronchiolitis, many young children continue to receive this therapy. 8