K Heyer1, S Milde2, J Schmitt3, M May4, J Helfrich5, M Augustin6. 1. Competenzzentrum Versorgungsforschung in der Dermatologie (CVderm), Institut für Versorgungsforschung in der Dermatologie (IVDP), Universitätsklinikum Hamburg-Eppendorf, Martinistraße 52, 20246, Hamburg, Deutschland. k.heyer@uke.de. 2. AOK-Bundesverband, Berlin, Deutschland. 3. Zentrum für Evidenzbasierte Gesundheitsversorgung (ZEGV), TU Dresden, Dresden, Deutschland. 4. AOK Rheinland/Hamburg, Hamburg, Deutschland. 5. DAK-Gesundheit, Hamburg, Deutschland. 6. Competenzzentrum Versorgungsforschung in der Dermatologie (CVderm), Institut für Versorgungsforschung in der Dermatologie (IVDP), Universitätsklinikum Hamburg-Eppendorf, Martinistraße 52, 20246, Hamburg, Deutschland.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Selective agreements are becoming increasingly important in health care management. To date, no standard recommendations for the evaluation of selective contracts are available. OBJECTIVES: Against this background, a recommendation on the evaluation of selective contracts in patients with leg ulcers (LU) was developed and approved by the nationwide consensus conference. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Based on a systematic literature review and followed by a manual search through other possible evaluation indicators in the care of patients with LU, a Delphi-based consensus process was performed by various scientific societies, professional associations, insurances and supply networks. RESULTS: For the evaluation of efficiency and quality of care, a recommendation on the evaluation of selective agreements with patients with LU was consented in six meetings and in five multistage online surveys. In total, 44 evaluation indicators were identified in the quality subareas structure, process, and outcome. The outcome indicators are divided into clinical, patient-related, and cost-related indicators. CONCLUSIONS: The developed evaluation indicators represent the quality of care in patients with LU. The indicators can be applied individually, depending on the agreed contract-specific supply target. After implementation of this national standard, the comparability of selective agreements in the management of patients with LU can be ensured and consolidated.
BACKGROUND: Selective agreements are becoming increasingly important in health care management. To date, no standard recommendations for the evaluation of selective contracts are available. OBJECTIVES: Against this background, a recommendation on the evaluation of selective contracts in patients with leg ulcers (LU) was developed and approved by the nationwide consensus conference. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Based on a systematic literature review and followed by a manual search through other possible evaluation indicators in the care of patients with LU, a Delphi-based consensus process was performed by various scientific societies, professional associations, insurances and supply networks. RESULTS: For the evaluation of efficiency and quality of care, a recommendation on the evaluation of selective agreements with patients with LU was consented in six meetings and in five multistage online surveys. In total, 44 evaluation indicators were identified in the quality subareas structure, process, and outcome. The outcome indicators are divided into clinical, patient-related, and cost-related indicators. CONCLUSIONS: The developed evaluation indicators represent the quality of care in patients with LU. The indicators can be applied individually, depending on the agreed contract-specific supply target. After implementation of this national standard, the comparability of selective agreements in the management of patients with LU can be ensured and consolidated.
Entities:
Keywords:
Healthcare research; Leg ulcer; Standards of care; Treatment outcome; Wound healing
Authors: Sandra Purwins; Katharina Herberger; Eike Sebastian Debus; Stephan J Rustenbach; Peter Pelzer; Eberhard Rabe; Elmar Schäfer; Rudolf Stadler; Matthias Augustin Journal: Int Wound J Date: 2010-04 Impact factor: 3.315
Authors: K Herberger; S J Rustenbach; L Grams; K C Münter; E Schäfer; M Augustin Journal: J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol Date: 2011-05-14 Impact factor: 6.166
Authors: Wilma M Hopman; Elizabeth G VanDenKerkhof; Meg E Carley; Janet L Kuhnke; Margaret B Harrison Journal: Qual Life Res Date: 2014-01-12 Impact factor: 4.147
Authors: N Kirsten; K Herberger; M Augustin; W Tigges; C Behrendt; F Heidemann; E S Debus; H Diener Journal: Chirurg Date: 2018-11 Impact factor: 0.955