Seiji Miura1, Ryuji Miyata1, Shuji Matsumoto2, Takahiro Higashi3, Yoshinobu Wakisaka4, Tetsuro Ago4, Takanari Kitazono4, Koji Iihara5, Megumi Shimodozono6. 1. Department of Rehabilitation and Physical Medicine, Kagoshima University Graduate School of Medical and Dental Sciences, Kagoshima, Japan. 2. Department of Rehabilitation and Physical Medicine, Kagoshima University Graduate School of Medical and Dental Sciences, Kagoshima, Japan; Department of Rehabilitation and Physical Medicine, Graduate School of Medicine, Nippon Medical School, Tokyo, Japan. 3. Division of Health Services Research, Center for Cancer Control and Information Services, National Cancer Center, Tokyo, Japan. 4. Department of Medicine and Clinical Science, Graduate School of Medical Sciences, Kyushu University, Fukuoka, Japan. 5. Department of Neurosurgery, Graduate School of Medical Sciences, Kyushu University, Fukuoka, Japan. 6. Department of Rehabilitation and Physical Medicine, Kagoshima University Graduate School of Medical and Dental Sciences, Kagoshima, Japan. Electronic address: rihakoza@m2.kufm.kagoshima-u.ac.jp.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND AIM: In recent years, interest in the quality of medical care has rapidly increased worldwide. However, quality indicators that contribute to establishing standard treatment in stroke medicine, especially rehabilitation, are not well-developed in Japan. Japan has established Kaifukuki (convalescent) rehabilitation wards, and the development of quality indicators for stroke rehabilitation in the convalescent phase is an urgent issue. METHODS: We first reviewed the literature regarding quality indicators for stroke rehabilitation. Next, we extracted candidate indicators from identified reports and guidelines and surveyed educational hospitals certified by the Japanese Association of Rehabilitation Medicine. On the basis of the survey results, we reevaluated the suitability of the proposed indicators in discussions with an expert panel. RESULTS: The questionnaire survey highlighted several important items that revealed there is room for improvement in adherence. For stroke rehabilitation in the convalescent phase, we adopted 15 indicators that were feasible as indicators to be used for comparisons between facilities, based on scoring by and opinions of the expert panel. These indicators measured structure (2 indicators), process (5 indicators), and outcome (8 indicators). CONCLUSION: This is the first study to establish quality indicators to standardize stroke rehabilitation in Japan. We developed this set of 15 indicators using an evidence-based approach. However, many tasks remain for continuous quality improvement.
BACKGROUND AND AIM: In recent years, interest in the quality of medical care has rapidly increased worldwide. However, quality indicators that contribute to establishing standard treatment in stroke medicine, especially rehabilitation, are not well-developed in Japan. Japan has established Kaifukuki (convalescent) rehabilitation wards, and the development of quality indicators for stroke rehabilitation in the convalescent phase is an urgent issue. METHODS: We first reviewed the literature regarding quality indicators for stroke rehabilitation. Next, we extracted candidate indicators from identified reports and guidelines and surveyed educational hospitals certified by the Japanese Association of Rehabilitation Medicine. On the basis of the survey results, we reevaluated the suitability of the proposed indicators in discussions with an expert panel. RESULTS: The questionnaire survey highlighted several important items that revealed there is room for improvement in adherence. For stroke rehabilitation in the convalescent phase, we adopted 15 indicators that were feasible as indicators to be used for comparisons between facilities, based on scoring by and opinions of the expert panel. These indicators measured structure (2 indicators), process (5 indicators), and outcome (8 indicators). CONCLUSION: This is the first study to establish quality indicators to standardize stroke rehabilitation in Japan. We developed this set of 15 indicators using an evidence-based approach. However, many tasks remain for continuous quality improvement.
Authors: Zohair A Al Aseri; Fahmi M Al-Senani; Shaik S Ahmed; Amena F Almubarak; Dina A Alzahrani; Fatimah A A Alzaher; Maha A Altuwaijri; Mayar A Alsudais; Rawan Z Mahgoub; Othman Solaiman Journal: Neurosciences (Riyadh) Date: 2021-07 Impact factor: 0.906