• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

A policy analysis of the introduction and dissemination of external peer review (visitatie) as a means of professional self-regulation amongst medical specialists in The Netherlands in the period 1985-2000.

作者信息

Lombarts M J, Klazinga N S

机构信息

DamhuisElshoutVerschure, Julianaplein 33, 5211 BB, 's-Hertogenbosch, The Netherlands.

出版信息

Health Policy. 2001 Dec;58(3):191-213. doi: 10.1016/s0168-8510(01)00158-0.

DOI:10.1016/s0168-8510(01)00158-0
PMID:11640999
Abstract

By examining the introduction and dissemination of external peer review through site-visits (visitatie) amongst Dutch medical specialists, this paper sets out to deepen our insight into the dynamics of professional self-regulation and health care policy making. We explore how visitatie has been used in the political process between medical specialists and the state, serving as a strategy in protecting the autonomy of physicians. In the late eighties and early nineties, factors both internal as well as external to the medical profession all together determined the start and spread of visitatie. The conflict between state and doctors over the specialists' income, the introduction of the market oriented policies, new visions on quality assurance, the debate on the future of medical specialistic care and a new legal framework on quality assurance, challenged the medical community to find ways to reconfirm the public's trust in the self-regulating mechanism of the profession. One answer is found in carrying out 300-400 visitaties annually. During the past years, many stakeholders have perceived visitatie as a credible instrument in assuring quality patient care. The dynamics of professionalization and measurable impact of visitatie will determine whether or not it is here to stay.

摘要

相似文献

1
A policy analysis of the introduction and dissemination of external peer review (visitatie) as a means of professional self-regulation amongst medical specialists in The Netherlands in the period 1985-2000.
Health Policy. 2001 Dec;58(3):191-213. doi: 10.1016/s0168-8510(01)00158-0.
2
External peer review by medical specialist (visitatie) in a legal perspective.从法律角度看,由医学专家进行的外部同行评审(访问)
Eur J Health Law. 2003 Mar;10(1):43-51. doi: 10.1163/157180903100384668.
3
Measuring the perceived impact of facilitation on implementing recommendations from external assessment: lessons from the Dutch visitatie programme for medical specialists.
J Eval Clin Pract. 2005 Dec;11(6):587-97. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2753.2005.00595.x.
4
Quality management in medical specialties: the use of channels and dikes in improving health care in The Netherlands.医学专业中的质量管理:荷兰利用渠道和堤坝改善医疗保健服务
Jt Comm J Qual Improv. 1998 May;24(5):240-50. doi: 10.1016/s1070-3241(16)30378-9.
5
Developments in professional quality assurance towards quality improvement: some examples of peer review in the Netherlands and the United Kingdom.
Int J Qual Health Care. 2000 Jun;12(3):239-42. doi: 10.1093/intqhc/12.3.239.
6
Supporting Dutch medical specialists with the implementation of visitatie recommendations: a descriptive evaluation of a 2-year project.在实施访视建议方面支持荷兰医学专家:对一个为期两年项目的描述性评估。
Int J Qual Health Care. 2003 Apr;15(2):119-29. doi: 10.1093/intqhc/mzg020.
7
The assessment of poorly performing doctors: the development of the assessment programmes for the General Medical Council's Performance Procedures.表现不佳医生的评估:英国医学总会绩效程序评估方案的制定。
Med Educ. 2001 Dec;35 Suppl 1:2-8.
8
[The development of peer review among medical specialists in Dutch hospitals: self-regulation under pressure].[荷兰医院医学专家同行评审的发展:压力下的自我监管]
Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd. 1995 Apr 1;139(13):682-6.
9
Quality improvement of paediatric care in the Netherlands.荷兰儿科护理的质量改进。
Arch Dis Child. 2007 Jul;92(7):633-6. doi: 10.1136/adc.2006.104091.
10
The co-regulation of medical discipline: challenging medical peer review.医学学科的共同监管:对医学同行评审的挑战
J Law Med. 2004 Feb;11(3):382-9.

引用本文的文献

1
Evaluation of physicians' professional performance: an iterative development and validation study of multisource feedback instruments.医生专业表现评估:多源反馈工具的迭代开发和验证研究。
BMC Health Serv Res. 2012 Mar 26;12:80. doi: 10.1186/1472-6963-12-80.
2
Integrated care requires integrated supervision.综合护理需要综合监督。
Int J Integr Care. 2011 Jan;11:e009. doi: 10.5334/ijic.550. Epub 2011 Mar 14.
3
How can quality of health care be safeguarded across the European Union?如何在整个欧盟保障医疗保健质量?
BMJ. 2008 Apr 26;336(7650):920-3. doi: 10.1136/bmj.39538.584190.47.
4
Doctors and managers. Agreeing objectives could help doctors and managers work well together.医生和管理人员。商定目标有助于医生和管理人员更好地协作。
BMJ. 2003 Mar 22;326(7390):656. doi: 10.1136/bmj.326.7390.656.