Steel N, Melzer D, Shekelle P G, Wenger N S, Forsyth D, McWilliams B C
Health Policy and Practice, University of East Anglia, Norwich NR4 7TJ, UK.
Qual Saf Health Care. 2004 Aug;13(4):260-4. doi: 10.1136/qhc.13.4.260.
Measurement of the quality of health care is essential for quality improvement, and patients are an underused source of data about quality of care. We describe the adaptation of a set of USA quality indicators for use in patient interview surveys in England, to measure the extent to which older patients receive a broad range of effective health care interventions in both primary and secondary care.
One hundred and nineteen quality indicators covering 16 clinical areas, based on a set of indicators for the care of vulnerable elderly patients in the USA, were reviewed by a panel of 10 clinical experts in England. A modified version of the RAND/UCLA appropriateness method was used and panel members were supplied with literature reviews summarising the evidence base for each quality indicator. The indicators were sent for comment before the panel meeting to UK charitable organisations for older people.
The panel rated 102 of the 119 indicators (86%) as valid for use in England; 17 (14%) were rejected as invalid. All 58 indicators about treatment or continuity and follow up were rated as valid compared with just over half (13 of 24) of the indicators about screening.
These 102 indicators are suitable for use in patient interview surveys, including the English Longitudinal Study of Ageing (ELSA). The systematic measurement of quality of care at the population level and identification of gaps in quality is essential for quality improvement. There is potential for transfer of quality indicators between countries, at least for the health care of older people.
医疗保健质量的衡量对于质量改进至关重要,而患者是关于医疗质量未得到充分利用的数据来源。我们描述了一套美国质量指标在英国患者访谈调查中的适应性调整,以衡量老年患者在初级和二级医疗中接受广泛有效医疗保健干预措施的程度。
基于美国一套针对弱势老年患者护理的指标,涵盖16个临床领域的119个质量指标由英国10名临床专家组成的小组进行了审查。使用了兰德/加州大学洛杉矶分校适宜性方法的修改版本,并向小组成员提供了总结每个质量指标证据基础的文献综述。在小组会议之前,这些指标被发送给英国老年人慈善组织征求意见。
小组将119个指标中的102个(86%)评定为可在英国使用;17个(14%)被判定为无效而被拒绝。与筛查相关指标中略多于一半(24个中的13个)相比,所有58个关于治疗、连续性和随访的指标都被评定为有效。
这102个指标适用于患者访谈调查,包括英国老龄化纵向研究(ELSA)。在人群层面系统地衡量医疗质量并识别质量差距对于质量改进至关重要。至少在老年人医疗保健方面,质量指标在国家之间存在转移的可能性。