However, these are also issues that generally apply to all stroke patients, Hemphill et al Performance Measures for ICH e249 and this factored significantly into the writing group s delib- erations on whether to draft entirely independent and unique performance measures on these topics for ICH or to consider whether the existing performance measures on these topics should be adopted for ICH. In the 2014 AHA/ASA ischemic stroke performance measures, there is extensive discussion of the challenges and controversies concerning the use of dyspha- gia screening as a performance measure.10 In that document, the decision was made to create 2 dysphagia measures, 1 mea- sure for screening within 24 hours of hospital admission and 1 measure that requires passing of a dysphagia screen before oral intake. As of this writing, NQF endorses a measure for dyspha- gia screening before oral intake, but it does not specify a time or require that the dysphagia screen is passed. The ICH perfor- mance measure writing group extensively discussed the exist- ing controversies in dysphagia screening and ultimately felt that harmonization with the 2 measures from the ischemic stroke set made the most sense. Similarly, the writing group recognized that the performance measure requiring assessment for rehabili- tation is associated with high compliance already and does not specify the type of rehabilitation services provided.29 Even so, the writing group felt it was important to have a performance measure that pertained to rehabilitation services because this is a Class I recommendation in the ICH guidelines, and harmo- nization with the ischemic stroke set was prioritized given that there were no ICH-specific rehabilitation recommendations that superseded this. Three new ICH-specific performance measures are pro- posed as part of this measure set. These new measures deserve pilot testing to assess feasibility and reliability. 