Literature DB >> 1533890

Using health status measures in the hospital setting: from acute care to 'outcomes management'.

D Lansky1, J B Butler, F T Waller.   

Abstract

In recent years, employers, insurers, and government purchasers have paid increased attention to the measurement of patient outcomes and health status. Such interest is stimulated less by policy or quality concerns than by the need to reduce health care expenditures. Any expected benefits which might accrue from health status measurement will require active participation by community hospitals and their affiliated physicians. St. Vincent Hospital and Medical Center in Portland, Oregon has begun hospital-wide use of outcomes measurement systems. This study presents case studies of outcomes measurement for low back pain and total hip replacement, summarizes the hospital's objectives in implementing such measures, and identifies several strategies for successful adoption of health status measures in community practice.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1992        PMID: 1533890     DOI: 10.1097/00005650-199205001-00006

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


  23 in total

1.  The concept of clinically meaningful difference in health-related quality-of-life research. How meaningful is it?

Authors:  R D Hays; J M Woolley
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2000-11       Impact factor: 4.981

Review 2.  A comparative review of generic quality-of-life instruments.

Authors:  S J Coons; S Rao; D L Keininger; R D Hays
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2000-01       Impact factor: 4.981

3.  Prospective versus retrospective measurement of change in health status: a community based study in Geneva, Switzerland.

Authors:  T V Perneger; J F Etter; A Rougemont
Journal:  J Epidemiol Community Health       Date:  1997-06       Impact factor: 3.710

4.  A pragmatic defence of health status measures.

Authors:  R Fitzpatrick
Journal:  Health Care Anal       Date:  1996-11

Review 5.  Patient defined outcomes.

Authors:  A R Davies
Journal:  Qual Health Care       Date:  1994-06

6.  The impact of menopause on health-related quality of life: results from the STRIDE longitudinal study.

Authors:  Rachel Hess; Rebecca C Thurston; Ron D Hays; Chung-Chou H Chang; Stacey N Dillon; Roberta B Ness; Cindy L Bryce; Wishwa N Kapoor; Karen A Matthews
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2011-07-14       Impact factor: 4.147

7.  Comparison between exploratory factor-analytic and SEM-based approaches to constructing SF-36 summary scores.

Authors:  Fotios Anagnostopoulos; Dimitris Niakas; Yannis Tountas
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2008-11-26       Impact factor: 4.147

8.  International Quality of Life Assessment (IQOLA) Project.

Authors:  N K Aaronson; C Acquadro; J Alonso; G Apolone; D Bucquet; M Bullinger; K Bungay; S Fukuhara; B Gandek; S Keller
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  1992-10       Impact factor: 4.147

9.  Quality of life research and health technology assessment--a time for synergy.

Authors:  R N Battista; M J Hodge
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  1996-08       Impact factor: 4.147

10.  A Core Set of Outcome Measures for Adults With Neurologic Conditions Undergoing Rehabilitation: A CLINICAL PRACTICE GUIDELINE.

Authors:  Jennifer L Moore; Kirsten Potter; Kathleen Blankshain; Sandra L Kaplan; Linda C OʼDwyer; Jane E Sullivan
Journal:  J Neurol Phys Ther       Date:  2018-07       Impact factor: 3.649

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.