Multi-stakeholder perspectives in defining health-services quality in cataract care

ObjectiveThis study aims to advance understanding of globally valid versus country-specific quality dimensions and indicators, as perceived by relevant stakeholders. It specifically addresses patient-level indicators for cataract surgery.DesignA mixed-methods case study comparing Singapore and The NetherlandsSettingSingapore (2017–2019) and The Netherlands (2014–2015).ParticipantsStakeholder representatives of cataract care in Singapore and The Netherlands.InterventionBased on the previously identified complete set of stakeholders in The Netherlands, we identified stakeholders of cataract care in Singapore. Stakeholder representatives then established a multi-stakeholder perspective on the quality of cataract care using a concept mapping approach. This yielded a multidimensional cluster map based on multivariate statistical analyses. Consensus-based quality dimensions were subsequently defined during a plenary session. Thereafter, Singaporean dimensions were matched with dimensions obtained in The Netherlands to identify commonalities and differences.Main outcome measureHealth-services quality dimensions of cataract care.Results19 Singaporean stakeholders representing patients, general practitioners, ophthalmologists, nurses, care providers, researchers and clinical auditors defined health-services quality of cataract care using the following eight dimensions: clinical outcome, patient outcomes, surgical process, surgical safety, patient experience, access, cost and standards of care. Compared with the Dutch results, 61% of the indicators were allocated to dimensions of comparable names and compositions. Considerable differences also existed in the composition of some dimensions and the importance attached to indicators.Conclusions and relevanceThis study on cataract care in Singapore and The Netherlands shows that cataract care quality measurement instruments can share a common international core. At the same time, it emphasises the importance of taking a country-specific multi-stakeholder approach to quality definition and measurement. Complementing an international core set with country-specific measures is required to ensure that the included dimensions and indicators adequately capture the country-specific quality views.

Download Full-text

Health services. Quality management systems. Guide for the use of EN ISO 9004:2000 in health services for performance improvement

10.3403/30158823u ◽

2015 ◽

Keyword(s):

Quality Management ◽

Health Services ◽

Performance Improvement ◽

Services Quality ◽

Management Systems ◽

Quality Management Systems

Download Full-text

Multi-stakeholder perspectives on the impacts of service robots in urban hotel rooms

Technology in Society ◽

10.1016/j.techsoc.2021.101846 ◽

2022 ◽

pp. 101846

Author(s):

Lina Zhong ◽

Rohit Verma ◽

Wenqi Wei ◽

Alastair M. Morrsion ◽

Liyu Yang

Keyword(s):

Service Robots ◽

Stakeholder Perspectives ◽

Multi Stakeholder

Download Full-text

Quality

Commissioning and a Population Approach to Health Services Decision-Making ◽

10.1093/oso/9780198840732.003.0013 ◽

2020 ◽

pp. 166-183

Author(s):

Julie Sin

Keyword(s):

Health Services ◽

Health System ◽

Services Quality ◽

Quality Care ◽

System Level ◽

Quality Of Services ◽

Provider Perspective ◽

Multidimensional Concept

This chapter looks at the topic of health services quality from a commissioning and whole population perspective. Quality is noted to be a multidimensional concept and dimensions of quality are considered. The role of the commissioner in maintaining and improving quality of services is explored, and this is seen within a wider backdrop of a health system with commissioner and provider functions (if there are such distinctions in the system). Commissioners need to know whether they are securing quality care for their population for the money spent. They also need an understanding of how this dovetails with the provider perspective on this topic. Commissioners also need to be able to articulate what they wish to assess in practice under the guise of quality. Finally, at a system level there are also bearings on how to compile and interpret a picture of a population’s health if needed.

Download Full-text

From fear to festivity: Multi‐stakeholder perspectives on human‐elephant conflict and coexistence in India

Journal of Public Affairs ◽

10.1002/pa.2496 ◽

2020 ◽

Author(s):

Medha Nayak ◽

Pranaya Kumar Swain

Keyword(s):

Stakeholder Perspectives ◽

Multi Stakeholder

Download Full-text

Adolescent Friendly Services: quality assessment with simulated users

Revista de Saúde Pública ◽

10.11606/s1518-8787.2020054001812 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 54 ◽

pp. 36

Author(s):

Rosalila Pastrana-Sámano ◽

Ileana Beatriz Heredia-Pi ◽

Marisela Olvera-García ◽

Midiam Ibáñez-Cuevas ◽

Filipa De Castro ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Health Services ◽

Services Quality ◽

Qualitative Assessment ◽

Care Process ◽

Exit Interviews ◽

Barriers To Access ◽

Adolescent Friendly Health Services ◽

Nominal Groups ◽

Privacy And Confidentiality

OBJECTIVE: To assess the quality of adolescent friendly health services. METHODS: Qualitative assessment using the simulated user technique in first level clinics of Health Services of Morelos, Mexico, during 2018. Ten out of 17 facilities with non-exclusive adolescent friendly services were randomly selected. An additional facility with exclusive adolescent friendly services was included as an intensive subsample. Four adolescents served as simulated users interpreting different cases in the clinics. The total of 43 semi-structured exit interviews were conducted, and two nominal groups were made to assess the perceived quality from the adolescents’ perception of friendliness and experience. Thematic analysis of the data obtained was performed. RESULTS: Staff attitude was highlighted as a key element in the adolescents’ experience. Failures were found, such as the existence of bureaucratic barriers to access, lack of signage in clinics, lack of privacy and confidentiality, failure of physical examination during the appointment and lack of monitoring of the reasons for appointment. The exclusive clinic for adolescents offered more appropriate friendly services compared with nonexclusive clinics. CONCLUSION: Although the service is accessible in most of the clinics visited, it is still far from being friendly according to international recommendations. The exclusive clinic for adolescents stood out for having better structured mechanisms that can be implemented in nonexclusive clinics to improve the care process.

Download Full-text

Debunking the myth of industry 4.0 in health care: insights from a systematic literature review

The TQM Journal ◽

10.1108/tqm-10-2019-0245 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 32 (4) ◽

pp. 849-868 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Mauro Cavallone ◽

Rocco Palumbo

Keyword(s):

Artificial Intelligence ◽

Health Care ◽

Health Services ◽

Literature Review ◽

Systematic Literature Review ◽

Industry 4.0 ◽

Services Quality ◽

State Of The Art ◽

The State ◽

Content Type

PurposeIndustry 4.0, artificial intelligence and digitalization have got a momentum in health care. However, scholars and practitioners do not agree on their implications on health services' quality and effectiveness. The article aims at shedding light on the applications, aftermaths and drawbacks of industry 4.0 in health care, summarizing the state of the art.Design/methodology/approachA systematic literature review was undertaken. We arranged an ad hoc research design, which was tailored to the study purposes. Three citation databases were queried. We collected 1,194 scientific papers which were carefully considered for inclusion in this systematic literature review. After three rounds of analysis, 40 papers were taken into consideration.FindingsIndustry 4.0, artificial intelligence and digitalization are revolutionizing the design and the delivery of care. They are expected to enhance health services' quality and effectiveness, paving the way for more direct patient–provider relationships. In addition, they have been argued to allow a more appropriate use of available resources. There is a dark side of health care 4.0 involving both management and ethical issues.Research limitations/implicationsIndustry 4.0 in health care should not be conceived as a self-nourishing innovation; rather, it needs to be carefully steered at both the policy and management levels. On the one hand, comprehensive governance models are required to realize the full potential of health 4.0. On the other hand, the drawbacks of industry 4.0 should be timely recognized and thoroughly addressed.Originality/valueThe article contextualizes the state of the art of industry 4.0 in the health care context, providing some insights for further conceptual and empirical developments.

Download Full-text