Patients have more information today about their diseases

and treatment options than ever before. But patients have

not had tools to help them decide among these various

options, and doctors have not had tools to help gauge how

acceptable an option might be to a specific patient. As a

result, the medical decision made, in hindsight, may not

have been the most suitable one. 

In the area of health plan enrollment, information to help

patients make better decisions has not been made available.

For example, when trying to decide about which health plan

to join or provider to see, it would be useful to know about

the experiences of others already enrolled in that plan or

cared for by its providers, but that information has not been

published widely. This, too, could result in patients making

unsuitable decisions. 

This report describes tools developed by the Agency for

Healthcare Research and Quality that are currently available

to help patients and their providers make better decisions.

It suggests that a broader application of existing tools, as

well as the development of similar tools for different areas

of care, will improve the quality of care from the

perspectives of patients, providers, and health plans. The

tools described in this report include patient questionnaires

for prostate symptoms and visual function, a consumer

survey (Consumer Assessment of Health Plans Survey, or

CAHPS®), and several publications on choosing health

plans, obtaining quality care, avoiding medical errors, and

getting preventive care.

Health care evolves toward a 

patient-centered model 

Health care has been evolving away from a “diseasecentered model” and toward a “patient-centered model.” In

the older, disease-centered model, physicians make almost

all treatment decisions based largely on clinical experience

and data from various medical tests. In a patient-centered

model, patients become active participants in their own care

and receive services designed to focus on their individual

needs and preferences, in addition to advice and counsel

from health professionals. 

When patients and providers have a choice among

treatment plans, a patient-centered approach has much to

recommend it. This can happen when physicians do not

agree on the optimal management for the condition or when

different non-life-threatening outcomes may result from the

different treatments available for a condition. Examples of

such “preference-driven” conditions are benign

enlargement of the prostate and visual problems resulting

from cataracts. In such cases, the best treatment strategy

depends on the strength of patients’ preferences for the

different health outcomes that may result from a treatment

decision.1

Expanding Patient-Centered Care To Empower Patients

and Assist Providers

Making a Difference

• Almost all urologists use the prostate symptom index,

and many have changed diagnosis and management

strategies because of it...Page 2.

• Changes in visual function scores may be a better

measure of the benefit of cataract surgery than 

changes in vision measured by using a standard eye

chart...Page 3.

• Other information resources available to patients and

providers can help in choosing health plans, avoiding

medical errors, ensuring quality care and prevention

services...Page 5.

RESEARCH IN ACTION

Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality • www.ahrq.gov

Issue #5 May 2002
Questionnaires help determine treatment

preferences 

The shift toward patient-centered care has meant that a

broader range of outcomes from the patient’s perspective

needs to be measured in order to understand the true

benefits and risks of health care interventions. Tools

developed as a result of AHRQ funding have helped

patients with benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) and

cataracts make important treatment decisions.

Prostate disease

Patients with prostate disease are gaining greater input

into decisionmaking. Patient questionnaires to measure

symptoms of prostate disease are examples of tools that

give patients more input into their treatment while allowing

providers to make more effective use of their practice time.

AHRQ-funded research has resulted in a tool that allows

patients to describe and providers to assess the impact of

benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) symptoms experienced

by the patient.2 By considering the information provided by

this tool, the physician is able to make a better informed

treatment recommendation. Research has shown that this

tool can help physicians describe, evaluate, and predict

patient symptoms and treatment outcomes.

BPH is a very common condition, affecting more than 50

percent of men in their sixties and up to 90 percent of men

in their seventies and eighties. It is a nonmalignant but

progressive condition caused by prostate enlargement,

which can lead to obstruction of the urethra and chronic

urinary symptoms or infections. Prostatectomy—removal

of the prostate—is performed on many men each year to

treat this condition. Since BPH is rarely life threatening but

can have considerable impact on a patient’s quality of life,

treatments are more preference driven than for conditions

such as cancer.

Men who suffer symptoms from prostate enlargement have

the following alternatives: “watchful waiting,” medications,

or prostatectomies (as well as other surgical interventions)

to improve their health status. “Watchful waiting” is closely

monitoring a patient’s condition but not instituting therapy

until symptoms appear or change. For patients uncertain

about the necessity of surgery, watchful waiting and

medications are alternatives. In selecting any of the above

treatments, evaluating the symptoms from the patients’

point of view has become increasingly important as a

preliminary step.

Factors important to patients include how often symptoms

occur and how severe the symptoms are.3 In order to

measure these factors, AHRQ-funded researchers have

developed a patient questionnaire. 

Most urologists use the symptom severity index. The

questionnaire, developed in collaboration with the

American Urological Association (AUA), incorporates a

symptom index focusing on the severity of BPH symptoms

as reported by the patient. Middle-aged or elderly men

complaining of urinary difficulties and considered to have

BPH are requested to fill out a questionnaire. Each of the

seven questions included asks the patient to rank a

particular symptom on a scale of 0 to 5, with 5 being the

most severe. The symptoms are incomplete emptying,

frequency, intermittency, urgency, weak urinary stream,

hesitancy, and nocturia. (Questions are shown in Box 1.)

Upon completion of the test, the numbers are added up in

order to determine the overall severity of BPH-related

symptoms. Based on these totals, the patient’s symptoms

are classified as mild, moderate, or severe.4

According to a survey of over 500 urologists, 99 percent

were aware of and used the AUA symptom severity index,

and 21 percent of those had altered their diagnosis and

management strategies because of it.5 Measures of

symptoms and BPH-specific health status provide the most

detailed and sensitive measures of treatment effectiveness

from the patient’s perspective, according to AHRQ-funded

researchers.3

Other indexes for BPH have been developed. After the

development of the AUA index, AHRQ-funded researchers

developed two other questionnaires.3 The symptom problem

index (SPI) measures how bothered the patient is by BPHrelated symptoms, and the BPH impact index (BII)

measures how much a patient’s urinary problems affect

other areas of health. These measures could be more widely

used for the clinical benefit of patients.

2 www.ahrq.gov
The symptom index has also proved useful for prostate

cancer patients treated with brachytherapy. In addition

to being useful in the treatment of patients with BPH, the

AUA prostate symptom index has been helpful when

treating patients with prostate cancer who are undergoing

brachytherapy. Brachytherapy is a form of radiation

therapy in which tiny radioactive pellets are implanted into

the prostate in order to treat patients diagnosed with

prostate cancer. In one study, nurses monitored patients’

health status after surgery and discharge from the hospital

by conducting periodic telephone interviews that included

the symptom index.6 Depending on the patient’s response

to the index’s questions, the dosage levels of his

medications were adjusted or further tests recommended.

The researchers recommend that nurses use the symptom

index when they care for patients treated with

brachytherapy.

Cataract

Patients’ everyday visual function is linked closely to

their satisfaction with cataract surgery outcomes. The

Visual Function-14 Index (VF-14) is a tool that helps

patients and physicians assess the need for and the outcome

of cataract surgery. It acts as a supplement to the standard

eye chart (a key clinical test for vision) and other clinical

measures. 

Cataracts, the clouding of the eye’s lens, can cause vision

problems and are usually related to aging. At least 50

percent of all Americans age 65 and over have a cataract.7

To correct this condition, about 1.3 million cataract

extractions are performed on Medicare beneficiaries in the

United States each year.7 It is the most frequently

performed operation for Medicare patients.8

AHRQ-funded researchers developed the VF-14 to measure

patients’ experience—how well patients with cataract

disease were able to pursue their usual activities.

Specifically, the VF-14 measures the amount of difficulty

patients have in performing 14 vision-dependent everyday

activities, such as driving and reading small print. The

specific activities are shown in Box 2. 

To test the value of the VF-14, AHRQ-funded researchers

administered it to 775 pre-operative cataract patients along

with several tests of visual acuity and the Sickness Impact

Profile (SIP), a behavior-based measure of general health

status. The results showed that the VF-14 scores correlated

www.ahrq.gov 3

Box 1. American Urological Association symptom severity index for benign prostatic hyperplasia

1. Over the past month or so, how often have you had a sensation of not emptying your bladder completely after you finished

urinating?

2. Over the past month or so, how often have you had to urinate again less than 2 hours after you finished urinating?

3. Over the past month or so, how often have you found you stopped and started again several times when you urinated?

4. Over the past month or so, how often have you found it difficult to postpone urination?

5. Over the past month or so, how often have you had a weak urinary stream?

6. Over the past month or so, how often have you had to push or strain to begin urination?

7. Over the last month, how many times did you usually get up to urinate from the time you went to bed at night until the time

you got up in the morning?

For questions 1-6, there is a choice of six possible answers: never; less than one time in five; less than half the time; about half

the time; more than half the time; almost always. Question 7 has six possible answers, ranging from zero to five or more.

Source: Wennberg JF. Prostate Disease Patient Outcomes Research Team (PORT) Final Report. Rockville (MD): Agency for Health Care Policy and Research; 1995. Publication No. PB95-

253811.
more strongly with the overall self-rating of the amount of

trouble and satisfaction patients had with their vision than

did several measures of visual acuity or the SIP score.8

A related AHRQ-funded study looked at 552 post-operative

patients 4 months after their cataract surgery.9 The

percentage of patients who were rated as having improved 4

months after surgery depended on which outcome measure

was used: 96 percent had improved visual acuity as

measured on a standard eye chart; 89 percent had an

improved VF-14 score; 85 percent had improved

satisfaction with vision; 80 percent had less self-reported

trouble with vision; and 67 percent reported improvement

based on the general health status test (SIP).9 (See Figure

1.) As with the earlier study of preoperative cataract

patients, the patients’ ratings of their trouble and their

satisfaction with vision correlated more strongly with the

VF-14 score than with the change in their ability to read a

standard eye chart. 

To assess the relative importance of patient preferences and

the results of standard eye chart tests, another AHRQfunded study interviewed patients over age 50 who were

scheduled to have routine cataract extraction within 3

months for an age-related cataract. Using several tests, the

patients were asked to rate the effects of visual impairment

on specific aspects of their daily lives, including work,

leisure activities, walking, driving, social interactions,

concentration, memory, and feelings. They were then asked

to rate their current vision on a scale ranging from 0 for

complete blindness to 10 for perfect vision.10

The researchers found that patients’ level of satisfaction

with their vision before surgery was more closely related to

problems in specific aspects of daily life—especially

feelings of depression and problems in social interaction—

than to visual acuity as measured by the standard eye chart.

For example, more than 60 percent of patients reported

frustration with visual impairment, and more than 25

4 www.ahrq.gov

Box 2. Functional activities included in Visual Function-14 Index

The VF-14 measures everyday functioning in 14 areas:

• Reading small print (e.g., prescription labels).

• Reading a newspaper or book.

• Reading a large-print book or numbers on a phone.

• Recognizing people nearby.

• Seeing steps, stairs, or curbs.

• Reading traffic, store, or street signs.

• Doing fine handiwork (e.g., sewing).

• Writing checks or filling out forms.

• Playing games (e.g., cards, bingo).

• Playing sports (e.g., golf, bowling).

• Cooking.

• Watching television.

• Driving during the day.

• Driving at night.

Each item on the index was assigned a score, depending on the amount of difficulty the patient reported: 4 for “no difficulty”

with the activity, 3 for “a little,” 2 for “a moderate amount,” and 1 for “a great deal” of difficulty. A score of zero was

assigned when the patient was “unable to do” the activity because of his or her vision. Items were not included in scoring if

the patient did not perform the activity for a reason other than vision. 

Source: Steinberg E, Tielsch JM, Schein OD, et al. The VF-14 as an index of functional impairment in cataract patients. Arch Ophthalmol 1994; 112:630-8.
percent reported that their current vision caused problems

with driving, leisure activities, walking, and working.10

Many insurers (including Medicare) now require that the

results of the VF-14 be reported as a condition of claims

payment, and it has been adapted for use in at least a dozen

other countries. This measure is also required in all clinical

trials sponsored by the National Eye Institute to test the

benefits of new technologies and procedures for cataract

patients.

The VF-14 can be used with other eye problems besides

cataract, such as retinal disease and corneal grafts. For

example, in a study of corneal graft patients, researchers

found that the VF-14 accurately measured visual

impairment. They reached their conclusion after comparing

it with other measures of vision problems.11

Information on consumer choices empowers

patients

In addition to helping patients make better treatment

decisions, AHRQ also sponsors research and provides

information resources so that consumers may make better

informed choices when they select health plans and health

care providers and in their overall use of medical care.

Information is available from AHRQ on such topics as:

• Helping consumers choose health plans and get good

care from their doctor.

• Avoiding medical errors.

• Making sure they get proper preventive care.

CAHPS®

AHRQ’s consumer survey, CAHPS®, helps patients

choose health plans and obtain good health care.

Consumers can now access comparative information about

health plans based on other consumers’ experience with the

health care they received from plans and providers. This

information is available through CAHPS®, a survey

sponsored and funded by AHRQ and its partner, the

Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS).

CAHPS® results help inform consumers about their choices

among health care plans. They also allow health plans,

employers, and others to obtain consumers’ views of the

care they are receiving. The surveys are in the public

domain and available free of charge.

Many public and private entities use CAHPS® results to

make decisions about which plans to contract with or make

the findings available to their beneficiaries or employees so

they can decide which plan to enroll in. These entities

include more than 20 State Medicaid programs, 10

employer groups, the Medicare program, the Federal

Employees Health Benefits Program, the Department of

Defense, health plans surveyed by the National Committee

for Quality Assurance, and a division of Ford Motor

Company. In 1999, over 90 million Americans received

information on health plans resulting from CAHPS®.

12 

CAHPS® questionnaires are typically mailed to consumers

by the sponsoring organization (e.g., the Medicare program,

State health departments, and individual health plans).

Consumers are asked about satisfaction with:

• Getting needed care.

• Getting care quickly.

• How well doctors communicate.

• Courtesy and helpfulness of office staff.

• Customer service.

www.ahrq.gov 5

96%

89% 85%

80%

67%

Snellen

eye chart

VF-14 Satisfaction Less selfreported

trouble

Sickness

Impact

Profile

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Percent

Figure 1. Percentage of patients reporting

improvement after cataract surgery based on 5

measures

Note: VF-14 is the Visual Function-14 Index.

Source: Steinberg E, Tielsch JM, Schein OD, et al. National Study of Cataract Surgery

Outcomes. Ophthalmology 1994; 101:1131-9.
They are also asked to rate:

• Their physicians.

• Their health care.

• Their health plan.

After tabulation, results are presented, often in a report-card

format that shows how satisfied consumers are with

specific aspects of health plan and provider performance.

These reports are made available to those making

enrollment decisions.

CAHPS® can be used to collect information about

enrollees’ experiences with all types of health insurance

programs (Medicaid and Medicare beneficiaries as well as

the privately insured) and across the full range of health

care delivery systems, from fee-for-service to managed care

plans. Separate questions are designed to capture the

experiences of certain subgroups, such as people with

chronic conditions or disabilities, Medicaid and Medicare

beneficiaries, and families with children. This is especially

important because people in these groups may need

different types of information.13

CAHPS® is expanding its range. To assist patients in

choosing a specific doctor or group practice, the CAHPS®

team has developed a CAHPS® survey for group practices

and is examining the feasibility of a CAHPS® survey for

individual providers.

Other tools to help consumers choose quality care 

Consumers want and need more tools to help them decide

about which health plan or doctor is best for them. To meet

this need, AHRQ has developed, printed, and made

available on its Web site two documents: Choosing and

Using a Health Plan (AHCPR Publication No. 97-0011,

available on the Web at http://www.ahrq.gov/

consumer/hlthpln1.htm) and Be Informed: Questions To Ask

Your Doctor Before You Have Surgery (AHCPR Publication

No. 95-0027, available on the Web at

http://www.ahrq.gov/consumer/surgery.htm). 

Both documents focus on questions that patients need to

ask in order to ensure that they select physicians

appropriate for them. For example, there are specific

questions about:

• What services the plan covers.

• How well the doctor communicates.

• What hospitals the doctor uses.

• The risks and benefits of surgery.

• Alternatives to surgery. 

Information to help avoid medical errors

Sizable numbers of Americans are harmed each year as a

result of medical errors, according to an a report by the

Institute of Medicine.14 Although those working at different

levels of the health care system are primarily responsible

for changing the systems that contribute to these errors,

patients can take actions that might help them avoid

experiencing an adverse event. 

AHRQ has published a patient fact sheet, 20 Tips to Help

Prevent Medical Errors (AHRQ Publication No. 00-P038,

available on the Web at http://www.ahrq.gov/consumer/

20tips.htm). The tips focus on communication between the

provider and the patient. They help patients make sure that

they have both given the physician all the information that

he or she may need and also elicited for themselves all the

relevant information they might need to understand their

condition and treatment options. Although using all 20 tips

would be helpful, AHRQ also has published an abbreviated

list, Five Steps to Safer Health Care (Publication No. OM

00-0004, available on the Web at http://www.ahrq.gov/

consumer/5steps.htm), that has appeared in many consumer

publications. These steps are—

• Speak up if you have questions or concerns.

• Keep a list of all medications you take.

• Make sure you get the results of any test or procedure. 

• Talk with your doctor and health care team about your

options if you need hospital care. 

• Make sure you understand what will happen if you need

surgery. 

Information on preventive care

AHRQ sponsors Put Prevention Into Practice (PPIP), a

program whose goal is to preserve the health of all

Americans by increasing the appropriate use of clinical

6 www.ahrq.gov
www.ahrq.gov 7

preventive services, such as screening tests, immunizations,

chemoprevention, and counseling. Based on the

recommendations of the U.S. Preventive Services Task

Force, PPIP is a national initiative working in partnership

with public and private health care organizations. 

PPIP improves the delivery of preventive services and helps

facilitate communication between health care providers and

patients. Tools and resources inform clinicians about

recommended clinical preventive services in primary health

care and inform the public about the individual’s role in

staying healthy. PPIP materials are based on scientific

information and on evaluation by users. All materials are

evidence based and promote a team approach to the

delivery of preventive services. They are designed for

health care systems and clinicians, the office/clinic staff,

and health care consumers.

Pocket-sized booklets for the general public, including the

Personal Health Guide, Child Health Guide, and Staying

Healthy at 50+, are available in English and Spanish.

(AHRQ Pub. No. APPIP 01-0009, including the three PPIP

patient booklets, is available on the Web at

<http://www.ahrq.gov/clinic/ppipix.htm>.)

These guides provide tips and recommendations for

children, adults, and adults age 50 and over on health

habits, screening tests, and immunizations. They encourage

patients to actively participate in their preventive care and

include easy-to-use charts to help track personal health

information. 

The Clinician’s Handbook of Preventive Services, 2nd

Edition, is both a reference tool and a practical guide to

delivering clinical preventive services in a variety of

settings.15 A Step-by-Step Guide to Delivering Clinical

Preventive Services: A Systems Approach is an

implementation guide for health care systems.16 Other

materials, including preventive care flow sheets, reminder

postcards, and prevention timeline posters, are designed for

clinical office staff. 

For more information on how PPIP tools have been used,

go to <http://www.ahrq.gov/ppip/ppipcase.htm>.

AHRQ publications are available from the AHRQ

Clearinghouse at 1-800-358-9295.

Research continues

AHRQ is continuing its efforts to fund research that

advances patient-centered care.

AHRQ’s program announcement “Patient-Centered Care:

Customizing Care to Meet Patients’ Needs” is intended to

support the redesign and evaluation of new care processes

that lead to greater patient empowerment, improved patientprovider interaction, easier navigation through health care

systems, and improved access, quality, and outcomes.17

AHRQ-Funded Research on Patient-Centered Care

Prostate Disease Patient Outcomes Research Team, 1989-94. Dartmouth Medical School. Developed standardized

measurements of the symptom burden and health status impact of benign prostatic hyperplasia and early-stage prostate cancer.

Developed understanding of critical role of patient preferences for men with prostate disease.

Variations in Cataract Management: Patient and Economic Outcomes, 1989-95. The Johns Hopkins University. Documented

variation in clinical outcomes, patient functioning, patient satisfaction, and health care costs as a function of alternative

strategies for cataract management. Determined the values patients and ophthalmologists place on specific potential clinical

and functional outcomes of cataract management. 

CAHPS® (Consumer Assessment of Health Plans Survey), 1995-2000. Harvard University, RAND, Research Triangle Institute.

Developed and tested an easy-to-use kit of survey and report tools that provides reliable and valid information to help

consumers and purchasers assess and choose among health plans. The kit contains a set of questionnaires to ask consumers

about their experience with their health plans, sample formats for reporting results to consumers, and a handbook to help

implement the surveys and produce the reports.
Examples of specific strategies include electronic clinical

communication, self-management programs, Web-based

applications for patients and/or health care providers, and

shared decisionmaking programs. AHRQ encourages

projects that emphasize chronic illness, episodes of care

that extend beyond hospitalization, longitudinal care, and

priority populations. For more information, see the AHRQ

Web site at <http://grants1.nih.gov/grants/guide/pa-files/PA01-124.html>.

AHRQ funds are also being used to define the current

pattern of screening, diagnosis, and treatment of prostate

disease among primary care physicians and urologists.

Conclusion

AHRQ-funded research has developed patient-reported

functional status indicators that empower patients and assist

providers in achieving desired outcomes. Consumers also

benefit from CAHPS® survey findings and other

information resources that are available to the public in a

variety of media. 

Working together, providers and researchers can identify

new areas where such tools need to be developed, find ways

to test them in clinical settings, and implement them

broadly. By so doing, the health care system can come

much closer to realizing the goals of patient-centered care. 

For more information

This synthesis was written by Mark W. Stanton, M.A.

(mstanton@ahrq.gov). For further information on the

prostate symptom index and the VF-14, please contact Yenpin Chiang, Ph.D., at 301-594-4035. For information on

CAHPS®, contact Charles Darby at 301-594-2050.

8 www.ahrq.gov
References

1. Barry, MJ. Editorial comment. Urology 1994 Nov;

44:636.

*2. Wennberg JF. Prostate Disease Patient Outcomes

Research Team (PORT) Final Report. Rockville (MD):

Agency for Health Care Policy and Research; 1995.

Publication No. PB95-253811.

*3. Barry MJ, Fowler JF, O’Leary MP, et al. Measuring

disease-specific health status in men with benign

prostatic hyperplasia. Med Care 1995; 33:AS145-55.

*4. Barry MJ, Fowler FJ, O’Leary MP, et al. The American

Urological Association Symptom Index for benign

prostatic hyperplasia. J Urol 1992; 148:1549-57.

5. Gee WF, Holtgrewe HL, Albertsen PC, et al. Practice

trends in the diagnosis and management of benign

prostatic hyperplasia in the United States. J Urol 1995;

154:205-6.

6. Abel LJ, Blatt HJ, Stipetich RL, et al. The role of urinary

assessment scores in the nursing management of patients

receiving prostate brachytherapy. Clin J Oncol Nurs

2000 May/June; 4(3):126-9.

7. National Eye Institute. Facts about cataract. Web site:

<www.nei.nih.gov/health/cataract/

cataract%5Ffacts.htm>. Accessed Apr 11, 2002.

*8. Steinberg E, Tielsch JM, Schein OD, et al. The VF-14 as

an index of functional impairment in cataract patients.

Arch Ophthalmol 1994; 112:630-38.

*9. Steinberg E, Tielsch JM, Schein OD, et al. National

Study of Cataract Surgery Outcomes. Ophthalmology

1994; 101:1131-9.

*10. Bass EB, Wills S, Scott IU, et al. Preference values for

visual states in patients planning to undergo cataract

surgery. Med Decis Making 1997; 17:324-30.

11. Boisjoly H, Gresset J, Fontaine N, et al. The VF-14

Index of functional visual impairment in candidates for

corneal graft. Am J Ophthalmol 1999, 128:38-44.

*12. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality.

Translating Research into Practice. From the pipeline of

health services research—CAHPS®: the story of the

Consumer Assessment of Health Plans. Rockville (MD);

2000. AHRQ Publication No. 00-P014. 

13. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. Overview

of Consumer Assessment of Health Plans. 1998. Web

site: <http://www.ahrq.gov/qual/cahps/dept1.htm>.

Accessed Apr 2, 2002.

14. Kohn LT, Corrigan JM, Donaldson MS, Eds; Committee

on Quality of Health Care in America, Institute of

Medicine. To err is human: building a safer health

system. Washington: National Academy Press; 2000.

15. Office of Disease Prevention and Health Promotion,

Department of Health and Human Services [US].

Clinician’s Handbook of Preventive Services. 2nd

edition. 1998.

*16. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. A step-bystep guide to delivering clinical preventive services: a

systems approach. Rockville (MD); 2001. AHRQ

Publication No. APPIP 01-0001.

*17. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality and

National Institute of Mental Health. Program

announcement. Patient-centered care: customizing care

to meet patients’ needs. 2001, July 31. Web site:

<http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/pa-files/PA-01-

124.html>. Accessed Apr 11, 2002.

* AHRQ-funded/sponsored research

www.ahrq.gov 9

www.ahrq.gov 11

Previous issues of Research in Action are available for free from the AHRQ Publications Clearinghouse: 1-800-358-9295.

Please specify the AHRQ publication number when you call.

Issue Title Publication Number

4 Managing Osteoarthritis: Helping the Elderly Maintain Function AHRQ 02-0023

and Mobility

3 Preventing Disability in the Elderly With Chronic Disease AHRQ 02-0018

2 Improving Care for Diabetes Patients Through Intensive

Therapy and a Team Approach AHRQ 02-0005

1 Reducing and Preventing Adverse Drug Events To Decrease 

Hospital Costs AHRQ 01-0020
U.S. Department of

Health and Human Services

Public Health Service

Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality

2101 East Jefferson Street, Suite 501

Rockville, Maryland 20852

www.ahrq.gov

AHRQ Pub. No. 02-0024

May 2002