Moving specialist care into the community: An initial evaluation

2008 ◽  
Vol 13 (4) ◽  
pp. 233-239 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bonnie Sibbald ◽  
Susan Pickard ◽  
Hugh McLeod ◽  
David Reeves ◽  
Nicola Mead ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Care ◽  
Health Care Quality ◽  
Service Providers ◽  
Care Quality ◽  
Local Health ◽  
Hospital Services ◽  
Specialist Care ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Patient Reported

Objectives: To assess the likely impact on patients and local health economies of shifting specialist care from hospitals to the community in 30 demonstration sites in England. Methods: The evaluation comprised: interviews with service providers at 30 sites, supplemented by interviews with commissioners, GPs and hospital doctors at 12 sites; economic case studies in six sites; and patient surveys at 30 sites plus at nine conventional outpatient services. Outcomes comprised: staff views of service organization and development, impact on primary and secondary care, and benefits for patients; cost per consultation and cost per patient in new services compared to estimates of the price of services if undertaken by hospitals; patients’ views of waiting time, access, quality (technical and interpersonal), coordination and satisfaction. Results: New services required high initial investment in staff, premises and equipment, and the support of hospital consultants. Most new services were added to existing hospital services so expanded capacity. Patient reported waiting times (6.7 versus 10.1 weeks; p = 0.001); technical quality of care (96.2 versus 94.5; p < 0.001), overall satisfaction (88.2 versus 85.4; p = 0.04); and access (72.2 versus 65.8; p = 0.001) were significantly better for new compared to conventional services but there was no significant difference in coordination or interpersonal quality of care. Some service providers expressed concerns about service quality. New services dealt with less complex conditions and undercut the price tariff applied to hospitals thus providing a cost saving to commissioners. There was some concern that expansion of new services might destabilize hospitals. Conclusions: Moving specialist care into the community can improve patient access, particularly when new services are added to existing hospital services. Wider impacts on health care quality, capacity and cost merit closer scrutiny before rollout.

scholarly journals A scoping review of registry captured indicators for evaluating quality of critical care in ICU

2021 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Issrah Jawad ◽  
Sumayyah Rashan ◽  
Chathurani Sigera ◽  
Jorge Salluh ◽  
Arjen M. Dondorp ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Critical Care ◽  
Scoping Review ◽  
Health Care Quality ◽  
Grey Literature ◽  
Healthcare Providers ◽  
Evidence Base ◽  
Patient Reported Outcome ◽  
Care Quality ◽  
Patient Reported

Abstract Background Excess morbidity and mortality following critical illness is increasingly attributed to potentially avoidable complications occurring as a result of complex ICU management (Berenholtz et al., J Crit Care 17:1-2, 2002; De Vos et al., J Crit Care 22:267-74, 2007; Zimmerman J Crit Care 1:12-5, 2002). Routine measurement of quality indicators (QIs) through an Electronic Health Record (EHR) or registries are increasingly used to benchmark care and evaluate improvement interventions. However, existing indicators of quality for intensive care are derived almost exclusively from relatively narrow subsets of ICU patients from high-income healthcare systems. The aim of this scoping review is to systematically review the literature on QIs for evaluating critical care, identify QIs, map their definitions, evidence base, and describe the variances in measurement, and both the reported advantages and challenges of implementation. Method We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, and the Cochrane libraries from the earliest available date through to January 2019. To increase the sensitivity of the search, grey literature and reference lists were reviewed. Minimum inclusion criteria were a description of one or more QIs designed to evaluate care for patients in ICU captured through a registry platform or EHR adapted for quality of care surveillance. Results The search identified 4780 citations. Review of abstracts led to retrieval of 276 full-text articles, of which 123 articles were accepted. Fifty-one unique QIs in ICU were classified using the three components of health care quality proposed by the High Quality Health Systems (HQSS) framework. Adverse events including hospital acquired infections (13.7%), hospital processes (54.9%), and outcomes (31.4%) were the most common QIs identified. Patient reported outcome QIs accounted for less than 6%. Barriers to the implementation of QIs were described in 35.7% of articles and divided into operational barriers (51%) and acceptability barriers (49%). Conclusions Despite the complexity and risk associated with ICU care, there are only a small number of operational indicators used. Future selection of QIs would benefit from a stakeholder-driven approach, whereby the values of patients and communities and the priorities for actionable improvement as perceived by healthcare providers are prioritized and include greater focus on measuring discriminable processes of care.

scholarly journals Better Life Index and Health Care Quality Indicators, Two New Instruments to Evaluate the Healthcare System

2018 ◽  
Vol 13 (2) ◽  
pp. 29
Author(s):  
Paolo Pietro Biancone ◽  
Silvana Secinaro ◽  
Valerio Brescia
Keyword(s):  
Health Care Quality ◽  
Well Being ◽  
Care Quality ◽  
P Value ◽  
Local Health ◽  
Better Life Index ◽  
Long Time ◽  
Health Care Quality Indicators ◽  
New Instruments

Local health companies have been trying to report quantitative and qualitative information through social reporting tools for a long time. The OECD has been questioning for quite some time how to evaluate satisfaction and quality by not considering the economic aspect alone in the quest for satisfying the needs of the citizen. The aim of the work is to evaluate how the compound indicator of well-being perceived by the population and the composite indicator of the quality of health services can be used to define health policies considering the incidence of other variables. In the analysis, it is therefore assessed how much the two indicators are related and linked to other variables that need to be considered and how independent indicators are used without further evaluations to target policies. The data are updated to October 18, 2017. All statistical analyses were performed using STATA V.13 (Stata Corp, College Station, Texas, USA, 2013) and p value <0.05 was considered significant for all analyses. The sample is made up of 35 OECD countries.

scholarly journals Optimalisasi peran & fungsi manajemen kepala ruangan dalam supervisi dokumentasi asuhan keperawatan di rumah sakit x Jakarta

2021 ◽  
Vol 14 (4) ◽  
pp. 536-544
Author(s):  
Teresa Teresa ◽  
Tuti Afrianti ◽  
Tini Suminarti
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Care ◽  
Nursing Care ◽  
Health Care Quality ◽  
Descriptive Analysis ◽  
Pilot Project ◽  
Poor Quality ◽  
Care Quality ◽  
Nursing Documentation ◽  
Head Nurse

The role of a head nurse in optimizing of management function in supervision of nursing care documentation at X hospital in JakartaBackground: Nursing documentation is important thing that  is indicator quality of care. Since the nursing documentation is still a poor quality, it requires a supervision by the head nurse.Purpose: The head of nursing is responsible for the direction, organization and strategic planning collaborate with nursing staffs in ensuring the quality of nursing care to achieve accurate, effective and efficient documentation and to complete supervision.Method: A pilot project using questionnaire and observation methods was conducted at difference times on two hospital units in Jakarta.Results: The descriptive analysis results showed that among 18 nurses, 4 nurses believed that nursing documentation is an important, effective and clear way to  ease their job. Hence, supervision is continuity needed to support the improvement of health care quality. The innovative projects will be applied in health care.Conclusion:  Nursing documentation must show continuity and quality of  care nursing under the control and supervision of the head nurse and EMR is used as the instrument for documentation.Keywords :  The role; Head nurse; Management; Supervision; Nursing care; DocumentationPendahuluan: Dokumentasi asuhan keperawatan adalah hal yang penting karena menjadi indikator kualitas perawatan. Penerapan dokumentasi asuhan keperawatan saat ini belum optimal sehingga membutuhkan arahan dan supervisi dari Kepala Ruang/Kepala Unit.Tujuan: Tercapainya supervisi dan keberhasilan pelaksanaan dokumentasi asuhan keperawatan yang komprehensif, berkesinambungan, efektif dan  efisien.Metode: Metode pilot project di salah satu Rumah Sakit di Jakarta dengan pengambilan data melalui  observasi dan kuestioner. Instrumen diujikan pada dua ruangan dalam  waktu yang berbeda.Hasil: Analisis deskripsi pada  sejumlah 18 perawat, 4 orang menyatakan bermanfaat, penting dan mudah dalam penerapannya. Supervisi dilakukan untuk memberikan support terhadap kelangsungan pendokumentasian asuhan keperawatan yang berkesinambungan. Proyek inovasi akan ditindaklanjuti dan diaplikasikan dalam program kerja bidang pelayanan keperawatan.Simpulan: Asuhan keperawatan yang berkualitas memerlukan adanya supervisi. Sarannya penggunaan Instrumen Supervise Dokumentasi Asuhan Keperawatan akan disesuaikan dengan penggunaan pencatatan asuhan keperawatan Elektronic Medical Record/EMR

scholarly journals Patient-reported quality of care and pain severity in cancer

2014 ◽  
Vol 13 (4) ◽  
pp. 875-884 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kathryn A. Martinez ◽  
Claire F. Snyder ◽  
Jennifer L. Malin ◽  
Sydney M. Dy
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Care ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Nursing Care ◽  
Care Coordination ◽  
Symptom Burden ◽  
Care Quality ◽  
Pain Severity ◽  
Physician Communication ◽  
Patient Reported

AbstractObjective:Despite treatment availability, many cancer patients experience severe pain. Although patient assessments of care are increasingly employed to evaluate quality of care, little is known about its association with cancer symptom burden. The objective of our study was to examine the association between patient-reported quality of care and pain severity in a nationally representative cohort of cancer patients.Method:Quality of care was measured in three domains: physician communication, care coordination/responsiveness, and nursing care. Quality scores were dichotomized as optimal versus nonoptimal. Pain was measured on a scale of 0 (least) to 100 (worst). We utilized multivariable linear regression to examine the association between patient-reported quality of care and pain severity.Results:The analytic sample included 2,746 individuals. Fifty and 54% of patients, respectively, rated physician communication and care coordination/responsiveness as nonoptimal; 28% rated nursing care as nonoptimal. In adjusted models, rating physician communication as nonoptimal (versus optimal) was associated with a 1.8-point higher pain severity (p = 0.018), and rating care coordination/responsiveness as nonoptimal was associated with a 2.2-point higher pain severity (p = 0.006).Significance of results:Patient-reported quality of care was significantly associated with pain severity, although the differences were small. Interventions targeting physician communication and care coordination/responsiveness may result in improved pain control for some patients.

scholarly journals Protocol: Improving Access to Specialist Nephrology Care Among Rural/Remote Dwellers of Alberta: The Role of Electronic Consultation in Improving Care for Patients With Chronic Kidney Disease

2019 ◽  
Vol 6 ◽  
pp. 205435811987871
Author(s):  
Aminu Bello ◽  
Deenaz Zaidi ◽  
Branko Braam ◽  
Mark Courtney ◽  
Jodi Glassford ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Care ◽  
Access To Care ◽  
Care Delivery ◽  
Care Quality ◽  
Care Providers ◽  
Practice Facilitation ◽  
Specialist Care ◽  
Nephrology Care ◽  
The Impact

Background: As the burden of chronic kidney disease (CKD) continues to increase, many geographically dispersed Canadians have limited access to specialist nephrology care, which tends to be centralized in major urban areas. As a result, many rural/remote-dwellers in Canada experience poor quality of care and related adverse outcomes. It is imperative to develop alternative care delivery mechanisms to ensure optimal health outcomes for all Canadians. Objective: To investigate the feasibility and effectiveness of electronic consultation (eConsult) as a new model for interactions between specialists and primary care providers (PCPs) to improve access to care for patients with CKD. Design: This is a sequential, mixed methods study that will be conducted in 3 phases. Setting: The study will be conducted across the entire province of Alberta, supported by Alberta Kidney Care (formerly, Northern and Southern Alberta Renal Programs [NARP/SARP]). Patients: Patients suffering from CKD will be included in the study. Measurements: We will assess the barriers and enablers of implementation and adoption of an e-consultation protocol to facilitate access to care for patients with CKD in Alberta with a focus on rural/remote-dwellers with CKD. We will also evaluate the impact of the eConsult system (eg, improved access to specialist care, reduction in care gaps), assess the feasibility of province-wide implementation, and compare eConsult with practice facilitation versus eConsult alone in terms of access to specialist care, quality of care, and related outcomes. Methods: The study will be conducted in 3 phases. In phase 1, we will assess the perceptions of stakeholders (ie, PCPs, nephrologists, patients, policymakers, and other care providers) to improve CKD care delivery, quality, and outcomes in Alberta with focus groups and semistructured interviews. Phase 2 will engage specific family physicians for their input on key factors and logistical issues affecting the feasibility of implementing eConsult for the care of patients with CKD. Phase 3 will provide academic detailing including practice facilitation to clinics in Alberta to assess how eConsult with practice facilitation compares with eConsult alone in terms of access to specialist care, quality of care, and related outcomes. Results: We will assess stakeholder perceptions about potential barriers to and enablers of a new eConsult and decision support system strategy, focusing on elements that are most important for the design of a feasible and implementable intervention. We will develop, pilot test, and assess the impact of the eConsult model in improving access to specialist nephrology care and the feasibility of province-wide implementation. The final phase of the project will address key challenges for optimal care for patients with CKD living in rural, remote, and underserved areas of Alberta, particularly timely referral and disease management as well as the cost-effective benefits of eConsult. Limitations: Lack of high-speed Internet in many rural and remote areas of Alberta may lead to more time spent in completing the eConsult request online versus faxing a referral the traditional way. Allied health care staff (referral coordinators, administrative staff) require training to the eConsult system, and physicians at many remote sites do not have adequate staff to handle eConsult as an added task. Conclusions: Implementation of eConsult can favorably influence referral patterns, access to care, care quality, patient outcomes, and health care costs for people with CKD. Results of this study will inform the optimization of care for rural/remote-dwellers with CKD and will facilitate future partnerships with policymakers and provincial renal programs in Alberta to ensure optimal kidney health for all residents. Trial registration: Not required.

Self-reported patient experience and quality of care among elderly patients with colon cancer.

2020 ◽  
Vol 38 (4_suppl) ◽  
pp. 33-33 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rebecca A Snyder ◽  
Rebecca Wardrop ◽  
Alexander Mclain ◽  
Alexander A. Parikh ◽  
Anna Cass
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
Patient Experience ◽  
Cancer Care ◽  
Health Care Quality ◽  
Care Quality ◽  
Stage I ◽  
Stage Iii ◽  
Experience Of Care ◽  
Patient Reported

33 Background: Although studies have identified demographic and clinical factors associated with quality colorectal cancer care, the association between patient-reported experience of care and quality of care is unknown. Our primary aim was to assess the relationship between patient-reported experience of care and receipt of guideline-concordant colon cancer (CC) treatment. Methods: Fee-For-Service Medicare beneficiaries with resected stage I-III CC (2003-2013) were identified in the linked SEER registry and Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems patient experience survey (SEER-CAHPS) dataset. Patient-reported ratings were compared based on receipt of care consistent with recommended treatment guidelines [resection of ≥ 12 lymph nodes (LN) (stage I-III) and receipt of adjuvant chemotherapy (stage III)]. Linear regression was performed to compare mean patient experience scores by receipt of guideline concordant care, adjusting for patient and hospital factors. Results: 1010 patients with stage I-III CC were identified (mean age 76.7, SE 6.9). Of these, 58.4% of stage I (n = 192/329) and 73.4% of stage II (n = 298/406) patients underwent resection of ≥ 12 LN. Among stage III patients, 76.0% (n = 209/275) underwent resection of ≥ 12 LN and 52.4% (n = 144/275) received adjuvant chemotherapy. By multivariable analysis, patient-reported ratings of health care quality, personal and specialty physicians, customer service, physician communication, getting needed care, and getting care quickly were similar among patients who received guideline-concordant treatment compared to those who did not. However, mean ratings of overall health care quality [91.3 (SE 2.0) vs. 82.4 (SE 1.7), p = 0.0004] and getting needed care [92.8 (SE 2.4) vs. 86.8 (SE 2.0), p = 0.047] were higher among stage III patients who received guideline concordant care compared to those who did not. Conclusions: Patient-reported ratings of health care quality and ability to get needed care are associated with guideline concordant cancer care among elderly patients with stage III CC. Further investigation is needed to determine if patient-reported experience correlates with other clinical measures of quality of colorectal cancer care.

Next level of board accountability in health care quality

2018 ◽  
Vol 32 (1) ◽  
pp. 2-8 ◽  
Author(s):  
Peter J. Pronovost ◽  
C. Michael Armstrong ◽  
Renee Demski ◽  
Ronald R. Peterson ◽  
Paul B. Rothman
Keyword(s):  
Patient Safety ◽  
Quality Of Care ◽  
Health System ◽  
Management System ◽  
Health Care Quality ◽  
High Reliability ◽  
Care Quality ◽  
Quality And Safety ◽  
Content Type

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to offer six principles that health system leaders can apply to establish a governance and management system for the quality of care and patient safety. Design/methodology/approach Leaders of a large academic health system set a goal of high reliability and formed a quality board committee in 2011 to oversee quality and patient safety everywhere care was delivered. Leaders of the health system and every entity, including inpatient hospitals, home care companies, and ambulatory services staff the committee. The committee works with the management for each entity to set and achieve quality goals. Through this work, the six principles emerged to address management structures and processes. Findings The principles are: ensure there is oversight for quality everywhere care is delivered under the health system; create a framework to organize and report the work; identify care areas where quality is ambiguous or underdeveloped (i.e. islands of quality) and work to ensure there is reporting and accountability for quality measures; create a consolidated quality statement similar to a financial statement; ensure the integrity of the data used to measure and report quality and safety performance; and transparently report performance and create an explicit accountability model. Originality/value This governance and management system for quality and safety functions similar to a finance system, with quality performance documented and reported, data integrity monitored, and accountability for performance from board to bedside. To the authors’ knowledge, this is the first description of how a board has taken this type of systematic approach to oversee the quality of care.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document