Quality of care, clinical efficiency and psychiatric care in the USA

1989 ◽  
Vol 2 (5) ◽  
pp. 691-694
Author(s):  
G L Gottlieb
2017 ◽  
Vol 152 (5) ◽  
pp. S844-S845 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ofor Ewelukwa ◽  
Alyka Glor P. Fernandez ◽  
Lee Ellen Carter ◽  
Roque Perez Velez ◽  
Sarah C. Glover

2017 ◽  
Vol 41 (S1) ◽  
pp. S230-S230
Author(s):  
A. Schröder ◽  
L.O. Lundqvist

IntroductionThere is a lack of cross-cultural comparison of patients and staff perceptions of quality of care in the psychiatric care. One reason is the absence of standardized instruments.ObjectivesThe international research programme “Quality in Psychiatric Care” aims at adapting the instrument QPC versions for patients and staff to different international settings.AimsThe aims are to test the psychometric properties and equivalence of dimensionality of the different language versions of QPC and also to describe and compare the quality of inpatient, outpatient and forensic in-patient psychiatric care across different countries.MethodsThe QPC is a family of self-reported instruments from the patients’ perspective. In this programme, we used different languages versions in three areas for patient and staff; inpatient (QPC-IP/IPS), outpatient (QPC-OP/OPS) and forensic inpatient care (QPC-FIP/FIPS).ResultsThe Danish versions for QPC-FIP and QPC-FIPS show that the confirmatory factor analysis revealed that the factor structure was equivalent to the original Swedish version. Patients rated the quality of care generally lower than staff and lowest in the participation dimension. The Indonesian version of QPC-IP is under analysis. The first result show that patients rated the quality of care lower than Swedish inpatients and lowest in the discharge dimension. Several studies in Indonesia are still ongoing as well as in Brazil and Spain.ConclusionsThere are few standardized instruments for measuring quality of care in the psychiatric care. Therefore, QPC is expected to makes an important contribution to the development in this field.Disclosure of interestThe authors have not supplied their declaration of competing interest.


2021 ◽  
Vol 5 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. 145-145
Author(s):  
Magdalena Osinska ◽  
Catherine Blatter ◽  
Michael Simon ◽  
Franziska Zúñiga

Abstract The question concerning the relationship of staffing and quality of care of residents in residential long-term care (LTC) has been explored extensively; however, no consistent evidence has been brought forth so far. Inconsistent measurement of staffing might hinder this research field to move forward. We assessed its measurement in a narrative review of reviews that explore the staff – quality of care relationship. We identified 12 systematic reviews, covering 1960 to May 2018. Most studies included had a cross-sectional design, were performed in the USA and worked with secondary, administrative data (e.g., OSCAR). Comparability of studies was limited by diverse definitions and measurement methods for staffing, including data about grade-mix, number of staff, and staff-resident ratios. We suggest performing international multi-case studies to compare and contrast LTC staffing and develop appropriate international common data elements. Logic models support the description of the expected relationship between staffing aspects and quality.


1994 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 39-48 ◽  
Author(s):  
Annibale Biggeri

SummaryA discussion of epidemiologic researches for the evaluation of psychiatric care is presented. With regard to the Italian context the author stresses the importance of analytical studies over the descriptive ones. The main design options for the evaluation of quality of care are then considered in the psychiatric framework.


1990 ◽  
Vol 156 (1) ◽  
pp. 27-36 ◽  
Author(s):  
Paolo Crepet

Ten years after the passing of the Italian psychiatric reform bill, the author assesses the state of the national mental health services. Albeit slowly, the decrease in the number of in-patients in mental hospitals is accompanied by a numerical increase in district and out-patient services. However, the quality of care provided and the regional distribution of services are not acceptable. The reorganisation has benefited hospital and out-patient services, but community care facilities remain inadequate. The mental health of the general population seems to be unaffected by the ongoing transition in psychiatric care.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document