Literature DB >> 9524910

Beyond health outcomes: the advantages of measuring process.

I K Crombie1, H T Davies.   

Abstract

The use of process measures in the assessment of the quality of care has been neglected of late. The outcomes movement has gathered momentum and process measurement appears to have been left trailing in the wake. Yet process measures can be sensitive indicators of the quality of care and have many advantages over outcomes. They are readily measured and can easily be interpreted; comparisons are not essential (as they are with outcomes monitoring) but even if used they are little bothered by the case-mix arguments which bedevil outcomes assessment. Further, the direct measurement of process can directly indicate deficiencies of care which need to be remedied. Finally, there are some aspects of care which are only amenable to study using measures of process. These benefits come at a price: first there must be good evidence that links the processes of care to desirable outcomes. This paper explores the advantages of measuring processes of care in quality assessment and advocates a balanced approach to the process vs. outcome debate.

Mesh:

Year:  1998        PMID: 9524910     DOI: 10.1046/j.1365-2753.1998.t01-1-00003.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Eval Clin Pract        ISSN: 1356-1294            Impact factor:   2.431


  13 in total

1.  Using routine comparative data to assess the quality of health care: understanding and avoiding common pitfalls.

Authors:  A E Powell; H T O Davies; R G Thomson
Journal:  Qual Saf Health Care       Date:  2003-04

2.  Instrumental variable methods to assess quality of care the marginal effects of process-of-care on blood pressure change and treatment costs.

Authors:  Puttarin Kulchaitanaroaj; Barry L Carter; Amber M Goedken; Elizabeth A Chrischilles; John M Brooks
Journal:  Res Social Adm Pharm       Date:  2014-08-01

3.  The quality of diabetes care following hospitalization for ischemic stroke.

Authors:  Nancy Pandhi; Maureen A Smith; Amy J H Kind; Jennifer R Frytak; Michael D Finch
Journal:  Cerebrovasc Dis       Date:  2009-01-29       Impact factor: 2.762

4.  Clinical audit indicators of outcome following admission to hospital with acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.

Authors:  C M Roberts; D Lowe; C E Bucknall; I Ryland; Y Kelly; M G Pearson
Journal:  Thorax       Date:  2002-02       Impact factor: 9.139

5.  What are the key attributes of primary care for patients? Building a conceptual 'map' of patient preferences.

Authors:  Sudeh Cheraghi-Sohi; Peter Bower; Nichola Mead; Ruth McDonald; Diane Whalley; Martin Roland
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2006-09       Impact factor: 3.377

Review 6.  Assessing the impact of patient navigation: prevention and early detection metrics.

Authors:  Tracy A Battaglia; Linda Burhansstipanov; Samantha S Murrell; Andrea J Dwyer; Sarah E Caron
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2011-08       Impact factor: 6.860

7.  [Decision-making process and evaluation of public health interventions].

Authors:  L-R Salmi; L Noël; F Saillour-Glénisson
Journal:  Rev Epidemiol Sante Publique       Date:  2022-07-10       Impact factor: 0.686

Review 8.  Outcome measures and needs assessment tools for schizophrenia and related disorders.

Authors:  S M Gilbody; A O House; T A Sheldon
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2003

Review 9.  Clinical performance measurement: part 1--getting the best out of it.

Authors:  Maria Goddard; Huw T O Davies; Diane Dawson; Russell Mannion; Fiona McInnes
Journal:  J R Soc Med       Date:  2002-10       Impact factor: 18.000

10.  Developing 'robust performance benchmarks' for the next Australian Health Care Agreement: the need for a new framework.

Authors:  Stephen J Duckett; Michael Ward
Journal:  Aust New Zealand Health Policy       Date:  2008-04-25
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.