Wisconsin Collaborative for Quality Healthcare

View Our Reports

print this page

Diabetes: All-or-None Outcome Measure (Optimal Control)  This is a measure developed by the Wisconsin Collaborative for Healthcare Quality (WCHQ).

Your Search Results: 50 Clinics in the Marshfield Clinic health system


The results below represent 28,242 patients with Diabetes.

The All-Or-None method is a more complete way of reporting the diabetes measure and has five goals. All five goals must be reached by each patient in order to meet the measure. For more information about how this method is different from reporting individual measures please click: Read More About This Measure

Reporting Period:

Sort By Rank | Sort By Name  
Btn Export
Arcadia Center (Inactive)

The number of patients or providers is too small for
purposes of reliably reporting performance
Athens Center (Inactive)

The number of patients or providers is too small for
purposes of reliably reporting performance
Bloomer Center

The number of patients or providers is too small for
purposes of reliably reporting performance
Cadott Center

The number of patients or providers is too small for
purposes of reliably reporting performance
Chetek Center

The number of patients or providers is too small for
purposes of reliably reporting performance
Chippewa Falls Center
N=489
45.40 %
View Historical Data
Clairemont Center

The number of patients or providers is too small for
purposes of reliably reporting performance
CLINIC_NAME

The number of patients or providers is too small for
purposes of reliably reporting performance
Colby-Abbotsford Center
N=367
33.24 %
View Historical Data
Cornell Center
N=139
48.20 %
View Historical Data
Cumberland Center

The number of patients or providers is too small for
purposes of reliably reporting performance
Eagle River Center

The number of patients or providers is too small for
purposes of reliably reporting performance
Eau Claire Center
N=863
46.23 %
View Historical Data
Eau Claire South Center

The number of patients or providers is too small for
purposes of reliably reporting performance
Elk Mound Center (Inactive)

The number of patients or providers is too small for
purposes of reliably reporting performance
Greenwood Center

The number of patients or providers is too small for
purposes of reliably reporting performance
Hayward Center

The number of patients or providers is too small for
purposes of reliably reporting performance
Ladysmith Center
N=457
46.17 %
View Historical Data
Lake Hallie Center
N=371
45.55 %
View Historical Data
Lakewoods Center

The number of patients or providers is too small for
purposes of reliably reporting performance
Marshfield Center
N=2995
40.20 %
View Historical Data
MARSHFIELD CLINIC
N=14786
42.95 %
View Historical Data
Marshfield Clinic at Howard Young Medical

The number of patients or providers is too small for
purposes of reliably reporting performance
Marshfield Clinic at James Beck Cancer Center

The number of patients or providers is too small for
purposes of reliably reporting performance
Marshfield Clinic Cancer Care at St Michaels

The number of patients or providers is too small for
purposes of reliably reporting performance
Menomonie Center
N=150
40.67 %
View Historical Data
Mercer Center

The number of patients or providers is too small for
purposes of reliably reporting performance
Merrill Center
N=696
40.80 %
View Historical Data
Minocqua Center
N=1207
41.09 %
View Historical Data
Minocqua Counseling Center

The number of patients or providers is too small for
purposes of reliably reporting performance
Mosinee Center
N=268
38.81 %
View Historical Data
Oakwood Center
N=423
50.35 %
View Historical Data
Osseo Center

The number of patients or providers is too small for
purposes of reliably reporting performance
Park Falls Center
N=533
32.83 %
View Historical Data
Phillips Center
N=125
44.00 %
View Historical Data
Professional Plaza

The number of patients or providers is too small for
purposes of reliably reporting performance
Regional Cancer Center

The number of patients or providers is too small for
purposes of reliably reporting performance
Rice Lake Center
N=1632
45.40 %
View Historical Data
Riverview Center

The number of patients or providers is too small for
purposes of reliably reporting performance
Stettin Center
N=534
44.19 %
View Historical Data
Stevens Point Center
N=154
48.05 %
View Historical Data
Stratford Center
N=172
42.44 %
View Historical Data
Wausau Center
N=771
46.56 %
View Historical Data
Wausau Oral Surgery

The number of patients or providers is too small for
purposes of reliably reporting performance
Weston Center
N=693
48.34 %
View Historical Data
Weston Oral Surgery Center

The number of patients or providers is too small for
purposes of reliably reporting performance
Wisconsin Rapids Center
N=417
41.25 %
View Historical Data
Wisconsin Rapids Orthopedics Center

The number of patients or providers is too small for
purposes of reliably reporting performance
Wittenberg Center

The number of patients or providers is too small for
purposes of reliably reporting performance
Woodruff Center

The number of patients or providers is too small for
purposes of reliably reporting performance

Diabetes All-or-None Measures

The Diabetes All-or-None Measures are two separate measures, one for process (optimal testing) and one for outcomes (optimal results). This measure contains five goals. All five goals within the measure must be reached in order to meet that measure. The numerator of each all-or-none measure is collected from the organization's total diabetes denominator.

Using the diabetes denominator optimal results includes:

  • Most recent A1C test result is less than 8.0% -- And
  • Most recent blood pressure measurement is less than 140/90 mm Hg -- And
  • Tobacco Non-User -- And
  • Daily Aspirin or Other Antiplatelet for Diabetes Patients with Ischemic Vascular Disease Unless Contraindicated -- And
  • Statin Use for patients ages 40 through 75 or patients with IVD of any age

Why use an All-or-None method?
This method was chosen because of the benefits it provides to both the patient and the practitioner. First, this methodology more closely reflects the interests and likely desires of the patient. With the data collected in two scores (optimal testing and optimal results), patients can easily look and see how their provider group is performing on these criteria rather than trying to make sense of multiple scores on individual measures. Second, this method represents a systems perspective emphasizing the importance of optimal care through a patient's entire healthcare experience. Third, this method gives a more sensitive scale for improvement. For those organizations scoring high marks on individual measures, the All-or-None measure will give room for benchmarks and additional improvements to be made.

Nolan T, Berwick DM. All-or-none measurement raises the bar on performance. JAMA. 2006 Mar 8;295(10):1168-70.


Disclaimer: Measures reported by WCHQ healthcare organizations represent a specific aspect of care in relation to an evidence-based standard, but are not clinical guidelines and do not establish standards of care.