Z G Zhao1, J Q Cheng2, S L Xu3, W L Hou4, J H Richardus5. 1. Shenzhen Center for Disease Control and Prevention, No. 8 Longyuan Road, Nanshan District, Shenzhen, 518055, China. Electronic address: zhaozhiguang@hotmail.com. 2. Shenzhen Center for Disease Control and Prevention, No. 8 Longyuan Road, Nanshan District, Shenzhen, 518055, China. Electronic address: cjinquan@szcdc.net. 3. Shenzhen Center for Disease Control and Prevention, No. 8 Longyuan Road, Nanshan District, Shenzhen, 518055, China. Electronic address: christylele@126.com. 4. Shenzhen Center for Disease Control and Prevention, No. 8 Longyuan Road, Nanshan District, Shenzhen, 518055, China. Electronic address: 494466593@qq.com. 5. Erasmus MC, University Medical Center Rotterdam, Postbus 2040, 3000, CA, Rotterdam, The Netherlands. Electronic address: j.richardus@erasmusmc.nl.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: This study sought consensus-based indices for quality assessment of the public health service (QAPHS) to evaluate the service quality of public health in Shenzhen and other cities in China. STUDY DESIGN: A qualitative study. METHODS: A list of quality assessment indices was formed based on Donabedian theory. These indices were presented to an expert panel in a two-round Delphi study to establish a consensus view. A weight of indices was established to validate the applicability and practicability of the framework. The specialist authority coefficient and Kendall's W were also calculated based on statistical analysis. RESULTS: A total of 30 experts participated in the Delphi study. Consensus was reached on four first-grade indices, nine second-grade indices and 28 third-grade indices. The specialist authority coefficient (Cr) was high (between 0.88 and 0.92), while Kendall's coefficient (W) of all the indices was ＞0.5 with statistical significant differences (P ＜ 0.05). This indicated correlation among panelists and had high reliability. CONCLUSIONS: A unified and hierarchical quality assessment index framework for public health services was established. The framework should be further tested and improved in practice.
OBJECTIVES: This study sought consensus-based indices for quality assessment of the public health service (QAPHS) to evaluate the service quality of public health in Shenzhen and other cities in China. STUDY DESIGN: A qualitative study. METHODS: A list of quality assessment indices was formed based on Donabedian theory. These indices were presented to an expert panel in a two-round Delphi study to establish a consensus view. A weight of indices was established to validate the applicability and practicability of the framework. The specialist authority coefficient and Kendall's W were also calculated based on statistical analysis. RESULTS: A total of 30 experts participated in the Delphi study. Consensus was reached on four first-grade indices, nine second-grade indices and 28 third-grade indices. The specialist authority coefficient (Cr) was high (between 0.88 and 0.92), while Kendall's coefficient (W) of all the indices was ＞0.5 with statistical significant differences (P ＜ 0.05). This indicated correlation among panelists and had high reliability. CONCLUSIONS: A unified and hierarchical quality assessment index framework for public health services was established. The framework should be further tested and improved in practice.
Authors: Yingya Yang; Liangliang Zhou; Chongmei Zhang; Xin Luo; Yihan Luo; Wei Wang Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2022-09-04 Impact factor: 4.614