Literature DB >> 9749483

The urgent need to improve health care quality. Institute of Medicine National Roundtable on Health Care Quality.

M R Chassin1, R W Galvin.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To identify issues related to the quality of health care in the United States, including its measurement, assessment, and improvement, requiring action by health care professionals or other constituencies in the public or private sectors. PARTICIPANTS: The National Roundtable on Health Care Quality, convened by the Institute of Medicine, a component of the National Academy of Sciences, comprised 20 representatives of the private and public sectors, practicing medicine and nursing, representing academia, business, consumer advocacy, and the health media, and including the heads of federal health programs. The roundtable met 6 times between February 1996 and January 1998. It explored ongoing, rapid changes in health care and the implications of these changes for the quality of health and health care in the United States. EVIDENCE: Roundtable members held discussions with a wide variety of experts, convened conferences, commissioned papers, and drew on their individual professional experience. CONSENSUS PROCESS: At the end of its deliberations, roundtable members reached consensus on the conclusions described in this article by a series of discussions at committee meetings and reviews of successive draft documents, the first of which was created by the listed authors and the Institute of Medicine project director. The drafts were revised following these discussions, and the final document was approved according to the formal report review procedures of the National Research Council of the National Academy of Sciences.
CONCLUSIONS: The quality of health care can be precisely defined and measured with a degree of scientific accuracy comparable with that of most measures used in clinical medicine. Serious and widespread quality problems exist throughout American medicine. These problems, which may be classified as underuse, overuse, or misuse, occur in small and large communities alike, in all parts of the country, and with approximately equal frequency in managed care and fee-for-service systems of care. Very large numbers of Americans are harmed as a direct result. Quality of care is the problem, not managed care. Current efforts to improve will not succeed unless we undertake a major, systematic effort to overhaul how we deliver health care services, educate and train clinicians, and assess and improve quality.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1998        PMID: 9749483     DOI: 10.1001/jama.280.11.1000

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  JAMA        ISSN: 0098-7484            Impact factor:   56.272


  238 in total

1.  Time to go public on performance?

Authors:  M N Marshall
Journal:  Br J Gen Pract       Date:  1999-09       Impact factor: 5.386

Review 2.  Reviewing audit: barriers and facilitating factors for effective clinical audit.

Authors:  G Johnston; I K Crombie; H T Davies; E M Alder; A Millard
Journal:  Qual Health Care       Date:  2000-03

Review 3.  Improving continuing medical education for surgical techniques: applying the lessons learned in the first decade of minimal access surgery.

Authors:  D A Rogers; A S Elstein; G Bordage
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  2001-02       Impact factor: 12.969

Review 4.  Organisational culture and quality of health care.

Authors:  H T Davies; S M Nutley; R Mannion
Journal:  Qual Health Care       Date:  2000-06

Review 5.  Enhancing public safety in primary care.

Authors:  Tim Wilson; Aziz Sheikh
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2002-03-09

6.  Public release of performance data and quality improvement: internal responses to external data by US health care providers.

Authors:  H T Davies
Journal:  Qual Health Care       Date:  2001-06

7.  Publicly disclosed information about the quality of health care: response of the US public.

Authors:  E C Schneider; T Lieberman
Journal:  Qual Health Care       Date:  2001-06

8.  Expansion beyond compression.

Authors:  M P Callery
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2003-04-03       Impact factor: 4.584

9.  Guideline adherence rates and interprofessional variation in a vignette study of depression.

Authors:  H Tiemeier; W J de Vries; M van het Loo; J P Kahan; N Klazinga; R Grol; H Rigter
Journal:  Qual Saf Health Care       Date:  2002-09

10.  Therapy modifications in response to poorly controlled hypertension, dyslipidemia, and diabetes mellitus.

Authors:  Nicolas Rodondi; Tiffany Peng; Andrew J Karter; Douglas C Bauer; Eric Vittinghoff; Simon Tang; Daniel Pettitt; Eve A Kerr; Joe V Selby
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  2006-04-04       Impact factor: 25.391

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.