Measurement of family health teams is underdeveloped
====================================================

* Angie Heydon
* John McDonald

With regard to the news article by Collier,1 innovators use evidence as the launch pad into uncharted territory. When innovations are evaluated, new evidence enables further innovation.

The 2007 Canadian Health Services Research Foundation synthesis report on primary care teams states, “There is high-quality evidence supporting positive outcomes for patients/clients, providers and the system in specialized areas such as interprofessional collaboration in mental health care, and chronic disease prevention and management.”2 The Ontario Health Quality Council reports that chronic disease affects one in three Ontarians and four out of five seniors.3 This is good reason to embark on the interprofessional innovation of family health teams. To date, data from some individual family health teams indicate measurable improvements are taking place. How widespread is this? What’s the overall return on investment? We don’t know beyond individual case studies.

Measurement is an underdeveloped area in family health teams innovation. The capacity to measure outcomes and the key processes related to these outcomes is absolutely essential for learning and improvement within a team, for developing the evidence necessary for primary care as a whole and for accountability to the taxpayers who fund the health system.

The Association of Family Health Teams of Ontario is advocating to advance performance measurement across family health teams and to move beyond what the ministry currently mandates (i.e., counting of patient enrolments, numbers of interprofessional health providers, and numbers of patient visits per interprofessional health provider).

Some letters have been abbreviated for print. See [www.cmaj.ca](http://www.cmaj.ca) for full versions and competing interests.

## References

1.  Collier R. Verdict still out on family health teams. CMAJ 2011;183:1131–2.
    
    [FREE Full Text](http://www.cmaj.ca/lookup/ijlink/YTozOntzOjQ6InBhdGgiO3M6MTQ6Ii9sb29rdXAvaWpsaW5rIjtzOjU6InF1ZXJ5IjthOjQ6e3M6ODoibGlua1R5cGUiO3M6NDoiRlVMTCI7czoxMToiam91cm5hbENvZGUiO3M6NDoiY21haiI7czo1OiJyZXNpZCI7czoxMToiMTgzLzEwLzExMzEiO3M6NDoiYXRvbSI7czoyNDoiL2NtYWovMTgzLzE0LzE2MjkuMS5hdG9tIjt9czo4OiJmcmFnbWVudCI7czowOiIiO30=) 

2.  Barrett J, Curran V, Glynn L, et al. CHSRF Synthesis: Interprofessional Collaboration and Quality Primary Healthcare. Ottawa (ON): Canadian Health Services Research Foundation; 2007.
    
    

3.  QMonitor: A report in Ontario’s health care system. Toronto (ON): Ontario Health Quality Council; 2007. Available: [www.ohqc.ca/pdfs/a3359\_qmonitor\_fsi\_eng1.pdf](http://www.ohqc.ca/pdfs/a3359_qmonitor_fsi_eng1.pdf) (accessed 2011 Sept. 9).