Research methods used in developing and applying quality indicators in primary care

被引:457
作者
Campbell, SM [1 ]
Braspenning, J
Hutchinson, A
Marshall, M
机构
[1] Univ Manchester, Natl Primary Care Res & Dev Ctr, Manchester M13 9PL, Lancs, England
[2] Univ Sheffield, Sect Publ Hlth, ScHARR, Sheffield S1 4DA, S Yorkshire, England
[3] UMC St Radboud, WOK, Ctr Qual Care Res, NL-6500 HB Nijmegen, Netherlands
来源
QUALITY & SAFETY IN HEALTH CARE | 2002年 / 11卷 / 04期
关键词
D O I
10.1136/qhc.11.4.358
中图分类号
R19 [保健组织与事业(卫生事业管理)];
学科分类号
摘要
Quality indicators have been developed throughout Europe primarily for use in hospitals, but also increasingly for primary care. Both development and application are important but there has been less research on the application of indicators. Three issues are important when developing or applying indicators: (1) which stakeholder perspective(s) are the indicators intended to reflect; (2) what aspects of health care are being measured; and (3) what evidence is available? The information required to develop quality indicators can be derived using systematic or non-systematic methods. Non-systematic methods such as case studies play an important role but they do not tap in to available evidence. Systematic methods can be based directly on scientific evidence by combining available evidence with expert opinion, or they can be based on clinical guidelines. While it may never be possible to produce an error free measure of quality, measures should adhere, as far as possible, to some fundamental a priori characteristics (acceptability, feasibility, reliability, sensitivity to change, and validity). Adherence to:these characteristics will help maximise the effectiveness of quality indicators in quality improvement strategies. It is also necessary to consider what the results of applying indicators tell us about quality of care.
引用
收藏
页码:358 / 364
页数:7
相关论文
共 111 条
[1]  
*AG HEALTHC RES QU, 1995, US CLIN PRACT GUID E, V2
[2]  
*AG HEALTHC RES QU, 1999, COMP NEEDS OR QUAL M
[3]  
*AM AC FAM PHYS, 2001, FAM PRACT MAN PRACT
[4]  
[Anonymous], 1995, ADV QUALITY TOTAL QU
[5]  
[Anonymous], 2001, TREATM CHOIC PSYCH T
[6]  
[Anonymous], 1982, Explorations in Quality Assessment and Monitoring
[7]  
[Anonymous], 2002, QUALITY INDICATORS G
[8]   Rating the appropriateness of coronary angiography - Do practicing physicians agree with an expert panel and with each other? [J].
Ayanian, JZ ;
Landrum, MB ;
Normand, SLT ;
Guadagnoli, E ;
McNeil, BJ .
NEW ENGLAND JOURNAL OF MEDICINE, 1998, 338 (26) :1896-1904
[9]   Is ownership more important than the scientific credibility of audit protocols? A survey of medical audit advisory groups [J].
Baker, R ;
Fraser, RC .
FAMILY PRACTICE, 1997, 14 (02) :107-111
[10]   Managing quality in primary health care: the need for valid information about performance [J].
Baker, R .
QUALITY IN HEALTH CARE, 2000, 9 (02) :83-83