Literature DB >> 12630804

Critical appraisal of clinical performance measures in Germany.

Max Geraedts1, Hans-Konrad Selbmann, Guenter Ollenschlaeger.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: One of the tasks of the Federal Co-ordinating Committee, as part of the self-governing health care system in Germany, is to develop clinical performance measures (CPMs). As these measures generally exert a strong impact on health care delivery, their methodological quality should meet the highest standards.
OBJECTIVE: To develop, for use in the German health care system, methodological quality requirements for CPMs and performance assessment programs.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: We assembled and reviewed internationally available materials on CPMs. From these we prepared lists of requirements for appraising the methodological quality of CPMs and CPM programs. PRODUCTS: Lists of criteria for use in appraising the appropriateness of the development, content, format and application of CPMs and their value to the health care system for performance measurement; a checklist for assessing the methodological quality of CPMs/CPM programs.
CONCLUSION: The methods applied and the products from this project offer a useful framework for prospective CPM/CPM program developers and set a high threshold for the development of methodologically rigorous clinical performance measurement.

Mesh:

Year:  2003        PMID: 12630804     DOI: 10.1093/intqhc/15.1.79

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Qual Health Care        ISSN: 1353-4505            Impact factor:   2.038


  10 in total

Review 1.  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

Review 2.  [Experiences of an Initiative Qualitätsmedizin reviewer].

Authors:  G Popken
Journal:  Urologe A       Date:  2019-10       Impact factor: 0.639

Review 3.  Assisting allied health in performance evaluation: a systematic review.

Authors:  Lucylynn Lizarondo; Karen Grimmer; Saravana Kumar
Journal:  BMC Health Serv Res       Date:  2014-11-14       Impact factor: 2.655

Review 4.  Guideline-based quality indicators-a systematic comparison of German and international clinical practice guidelines: protocol for a systematic review.

Authors:  Monika Becker; Jessica Breuing; Monika Nothacker; Stefanie Deckert; Mirco Steudtner; Jochen Schmitt; Edmund Neugebauer; Dawid Pieper
Journal:  Syst Rev       Date:  2018-01-12

Review 5.  Guideline-based quality indicators-a systematic comparison of German and international clinical practice guidelines.

Authors:  Monika Becker; Jessica Breuing; Monika Nothacker; Stefanie Deckert; Marie Brombach; Jochen Schmitt; Edmund Neugebauer; Dawid Pieper
Journal:  Implement Sci       Date:  2019-07-09       Impact factor: 7.327

6.  Development and proof-of-concept of a multicenter, patient-centered cancer registry for breast cancer patients with metastatic disease-the "Breast cancer care for patients with metastatic disease" (BRE-4-MED) registry.

Authors:  Stephanie Stangl; Kirsten Haas; Felizitas A Eichner; Anna Grau; Udo Selig; Timo Ludwig; Tanja Fehm; Tanja Stüber; Asarnusch Rashid; Alexander Kerscher; Ralf Bargou; Silke Hermann; Volker Arndt; Martin Meyer; Manfred Wildner; Hermann Faller; Michael G Schrauder; Michael Weigel; Ulrich Schlembach; Peter U Heuschmann; Achim Wöckel
Journal:  Pilot Feasibility Stud       Date:  2020-02-04

7.  Hospital quality reports in Germany: patient and physician opinion of the reported quality indicators.

Authors:  Max Geraedts; David Schwartze; Tanja Molzahn
Journal:  BMC Health Serv Res       Date:  2007-09-28       Impact factor: 2.655

8.  ASPIRE for quality: a new evidence-based tool to evaluate clinical service performance.

Authors:  Jeric Uy; Lucylynn Lizarondo; Alvin Atlas
Journal:  BMC Res Notes       Date:  2016-06-13

Review 9.  Quality indicators for the primary care of osteoarthritis: a systematic review.

Authors:  J J Edwards; M Khanna; K P Jordan; J L Jordan; J Bedson; K S Dziedzic
Journal:  Ann Rheum Dis       Date:  2013-11-27       Impact factor: 19.103

10.  What makes a good quality indicator set? A systematic review of criteria.

Authors:  Laura Schang; Iris Blotenberg; Dennis Boywitt
Journal:  Int J Qual Health Care       Date:  2021-07-31       Impact factor: 2.038

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.