Process and outcome indicators for evaluation of surgical activity in a high-risk gastric cancer area.

2011 ◽  
Vol 29 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e16537-e16537
Author(s):  
O. Nanni ◽  
M. Altini ◽  
P. Morgagni ◽  
A. Rossi ◽  
E. Ciotti ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Gastric Cancer ◽  
High Risk ◽  
Outcome Indicators ◽  
Process And Outcome ◽  
Process And Outcome Indicators

Quality Assurance in Psychiatry: Concept and Methods

1997 ◽  
Vol 12 (S2) ◽  
pp. 79s-87s ◽  
Author(s):  
W Gaebel
Keyword(s):  
Quality Control ◽  
Quality Assurance ◽  
Practice Guidelines ◽  
Psychiatric Care ◽  
Quality Care ◽  
Outcome Indicators ◽  
Continuous Quality ◽  
Process And Outcome ◽  
Standards And Guidelines ◽  
Process And Outcome Indicators

SummaryQuality assurance is the corrective action applied to any observed discrepancy between optimal and actual level of medical care requiring continuous quality control. Obviously, quality assurance is of utmost importance also in psychiatric practice. Quality care as defined by the degree of adherence to standards and guidelines can be measured in terms of structural, process and outcome indicators applied to inpatient, outpatient and complementary services. To promote the implementation of practice guidelines into psychiatric care conceptual, methodological, and organisational requirements must be taken into account.

scholarly journals Developing and measuring a set of process and outcome indicators for breast cancer

The Breast ◽  
2012 ◽  
Vol 21 (3) ◽  
pp. 253-260 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sabine Stordeur ◽  
France Vrijens ◽  
Stephan Devriese ◽  
Koen Beirens ◽  
Elizabeth Van Eycken ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Outcome Indicators ◽  
Process And Outcome ◽  
Process And Outcome Indicators

scholarly journals Reducing infantile anemia: insight on patterns of process and outcome indicators by ethnicity and socioeconomic class during a 10-year intervention program and 5 years after

2022 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Joseph Meyerovitch ◽  
Doron Carmi ◽  
Shraga Aviner ◽  
Michael Sherf ◽  
Doron Comaneshter ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Prevalence Rate ◽  
Intervention Program ◽  
Health Maintenance Organization ◽  
Hemoglobin Level ◽  
Socioeconomic Class ◽  
Health Maintenance ◽  
Outcome Indicators ◽  
Process And Outcome ◽  
Performance Rate ◽  
Process And Outcome Indicators

Abstract Background In 2005, Clalit Health Services (CHS), the largest health maintenance organization in Israel, initiated an intervention program aimed at reducing the prevalence rate of infantile anemia (IA). This study evaluated the progress made during the intervention (2005–2014) and its yield 5 years after it ended (2019). Methods The CHS database was retrospectively reviewed twice yearly from 2005 to 2014 for repetitive samples of children aged 9 to 18 months regarding the previous half-year interval, and a single sample in 2019. Data were collected on gender, ethnicity (Jewish/non-Jewish), socioeconomic class (SEC; low/intermediate/high), hemoglobin testing (yes/no), and hemoglobin level (if tested). Excluded were infants with documented or suspected hemoglobinopathy. Results At study initiation, the rate of performance of hemoglobin testing was 54.7%, and the IA prevalence rate was 7.8%. The performance rate was lower in the Jewish than the non-Jewish subpopulation. The low-SEC subpopulation had a similar hemoglobin testing rate to the high-SEC subpopulation but double the IA prevalence rate. Overall, by the end of the intervention (2014), the performance rate increased to 87.5%, and the AI prevalence rate decreased to 3.4%. In 2019, there was little change in the performance rate from the end of the intervention (88%) and the IA prevalence was further reduced to 2.7%. The non-Jewish and low-SEC subpopulations showed the most improvement which was maintained and even bettered 5 years after the intervention ended. Conclusions The 10-year IA intervention program introduced by CHS in 2005 led to a reduction in IA prevalence rate to about 3.5% in all sub-populations evaluated. By program end, the results in the weaker subpopulations, which had the highest prevalence of IA at baseline, were not inferior to those in the stronger subpopulations. We recommended to the Israel Ministry of Health to adopt the intervention countrywide, and we challenge other countries to consider similar interventions.

Are we measuring what matters in health technology assessment of disease management? Systematic literature review

2006 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
pp. 47-57 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lotte Steuten ◽  
Bert Vrijhoef ◽  
Hans Severens ◽  
Frits van Merode ◽  
Cor Spreeuwenberg
Keyword(s):  
Disease Management ◽  
Literature Review ◽  
Health Technology Assessment ◽  
Systematic Literature Review ◽  
Technology Assessment ◽  
Health Technology ◽  
Substantial Part ◽  
Outcome Indicators ◽  
Process And Outcome ◽  
Process And Outcome Indicators

Objectives:An overview was produced of indicators currently used to assess disease management programs and, based on these findings, provide a framework regarding sets of indicators that should be used when taking the aims and types of disease management programs into account.Methods:A systematic literature review was performed.Results:Thirty-six studies met the inclusion criteria. It appeared that a link between aims of disease management and evaluated structure, process, as well as outcome indicators does not exist in a substantial part of published studies on disease management of diabetes and asthma/chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, especially when efficiency of care is concerned. Furthermore, structure indicators are largely missing from the evaluations, although these are of major importance for the interpretation of outcomes for purposes of decision-making. Efficiency of disease management is mainly evaluated by means ofprocessindicators; the use ofoutcomeindicators is less common. Within a framework, structure, process, and outcome indicators for effectiveness and efficiency are recommended for each type of disease management program.Conclusions:The link between aims of disease management and evaluated structure, process, and outcome indicators does not exist in a substantial part of published studies on disease management. The added value of this study mainly lies in the development of a framework to guide the choice of indicators for health technology assessment of disease management.

scholarly journals The european primary care monitor: structure, process and outcome indicators

2010 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Dionne S Kringos ◽  
Wienke GW Boerma ◽  
Yann Bourgueil ◽  
Thomas Cartier ◽  
Toralf Hasvold ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Primary Care ◽  
Outcome Indicators ◽  
Process And Outcome ◽  
Process And Outcome Indicators

Deliver

Reset ◽  
2020 ◽  
pp. 111-116
Author(s):  
Robert Aunger
Keyword(s):  
Behavior Change ◽  
Planning Process ◽  
Outcome Indicators ◽  
Program Delivery ◽  
Process And Outcome ◽  
Process And Outcome Indicators

Perhaps the most crucial, but also most overlooked, step in planning behavior change programs is actually implementing it. Often, it is assumed that this will simply happen with great fidelity and reach everyone being targeted. However, logistical problems can abound. Planning in advance can obviously help with minimizing such problems. While the details of such planning will vary according to circumstance, certain goals of the planning process can be identified to guide it. Various ways in which one can monitor implementation and measure aspects of program delivery on the ground are also covered. Identifying process and outcome indicators can be crucial.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document