Literature DB >> 12544814

Connections between quality measurement and improvement.

Donald M Berwick1, Brent James, Molly Joel Coye.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Measurement is necessary but not sufficient for quality improvement. Because the purpose of the national quality measurement and reporting system (NQMRS) is to improve quality, a discussion of the link between measurement and improvement is critical for ensuring an appropriate system design.
OBJECTIVES: To classify approaches to the use of measurement in improvement into two different--although linked and potentially synergistic--agendas, or "pathways." To discuss the barriers encountered in each of these pathways and identify steps needed to motivate improvement in both pathways. RESEARCH
DESIGN: Descriptive, conceptual discussion.
FINDINGS: The barriers to the use of information to motivate change include, in Pathway I (selection), the lack of skill, knowledge, and motivation on the part of those who could drive change by using data to choose from among competing providers, and, in Pathway II (change in care delivery), the deficiencies in organizational and professional capacity in health care to lead change and improvement itself.
CONCLUSIONS: Neither the dynamics of selection nor the dynamics of improvement work reliably today. The barriers are not just in the lack of uniform, simple, and reliable measurements, they also include a lack of capacity among the organizations and individuals acting on both pathways.

Mesh:

Year:  2003        PMID: 12544814     DOI: 10.1097/00005650-200301001-00004

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Med Care        ISSN: 0025-7079            Impact factor:   2.983


  128 in total

Review 1.  Public release of performance data in changing the behaviour of healthcare consumers, professionals or organisations.

Authors:  Nicole A B M Ketelaar; Marjan J Faber; Signe Flottorp; Liv Helen Rygh; Katherine H O Deane; Martin P Eccles
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2011-11-09

2.  Nursing home price and quality responses to publicly reported quality information.

Authors:  Jan P Clement; Gloria J Bazzoli; Mei Zhao
Journal:  Health Serv Res       Date:  2011-08-22       Impact factor: 3.402

Review 3.  Development of quality indicators for colorectal cancer surgery, using a 3-step modified Delphi approach.

Authors:  Anna R Gagliardi; Marko Simunovic; Bernard Langer; Hartley Stern; Adalsteinn D Brown
Journal:  Can J Surg       Date:  2005-12       Impact factor: 2.089

4.  Perceptions of postoutbreak management by management and healthcare workers of a Middle East respiratory syndrome outbreak in a tertiary care hospital: a qualitative study.

Authors:  Bandar Abdulmohsen Al Knawy; Hanan M F Al-Kadri; Mahmoud Elbarbary; Yaseen Arabi; Hanan H Balkhy; Alex Clark
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2019-05-05       Impact factor: 2.692

Review 5.  Application of statistical process control in healthcare improvement: systematic review.

Authors:  Johan Thor; Jonas Lundberg; Jakob Ask; Jesper Olsson; Cheryl Carli; Karin Pukk Härenstam; Mats Brommels
Journal:  Qual Saf Health Care       Date:  2007-10

6.  Transparent measures are essential for coordinating and rewarding quality improvement in healthcare.

Authors:  William P Fisher
Journal:  MedGenMed       Date:  2006-11-13

Review 7.  Appraising the quality of care in surgery.

Authors:  Erik K Mayer; Andre Chow; Justin A Vale; Thanos Athanasiou
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2009-08       Impact factor: 3.352

8.  Does hospital performance on process measures directly measure high quality care or is it a marker of unmeasured care?

Authors:  Rachel M Werner; Eric T Bradlow; David A Asch
Journal:  Health Serv Res       Date:  2007-12-20       Impact factor: 3.402

9.  Public reporting of colonoscopy quality is associated with an increase in endoscopist adenoma detection rate.

Authors:  Heitham Abdul-Baki; Robert E Schoen; Katie Dean; Sherri Rose; Daniel A Leffler; Eliathamby Kuganeswaran; Michele Morris; David Carrell; Ateev Mehrotra
Journal:  Gastrointest Endosc       Date:  2015-10       Impact factor: 9.427

10.  A statewide controlled trial intervention to reduce use of unproven or ineffective breast cancer care.

Authors:  Liliana E Pezzin; Purushottam Laud; Joan Neuner; Tina W F Yen; Ann B Nattinger
Journal:  Contemp Clin Trials       Date:  2016-08-10       Impact factor: 2.226

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.