Phillips Charles D, Hawes Catherine, Lieberman Trudy, Koren Mary Jane
Program on Aging and Long-term Care, Department of Health Policy and Management, School of Rural Public Health, Texas A&M University System Health Science Center, College Station, Texas 77843, USA.
BMC Health Serv Res. 2007 Jun 25;7:93. doi: 10.1186/1472-6963-7-93.
Nursing home performance measurement systems are practically ubiquitous. The vast majority of these systems aspire to rank order all nursing homes based on quantitative measures of quality. However, the ability of such systems to identify homes differing in quality is hampered by the multidimensional nature of nursing homes and their residents. As a result, the authors doubt the ability of many nursing home performance systems to truly help consumers differentiate among homes providing different levels of quality. We also argue that, for consumers, performance measurement models are better at identifying problem facilities than potentially good homes.
In response to these concerns we present a proposal for a less ambitious approach to nursing home performance measurement than previously used. We believe consumers can make better informed choice using a simpler system designed to pinpoint poor-quality nursing homes, rather than one designed to rank hundreds of facilities based on differences in quality-of-care indicators that are of questionable importance. The suggested performance model is based on five principles used in the development of the Consumers Union 2006 Nursing Home Quality Monitor.
We can best serve policy-makers and consumers by eschewing nursing home reporting systems that present information about all the facilities in a city, a state, or the nation on a website or in a report. We argue for greater modesty in our efforts and a focus on identifying only the potentially poorest or best homes. In the end, however, it is important to remember that information from any performance measurement website or report is no substitute for multiple visits to a home at different times of the day to personally assess quality.
疗养院绩效评估系统几乎无处不在。这些系统绝大多数都试图根据质量的量化指标对所有疗养院进行排名。然而,由于疗养院及其居民具有多维度的性质,此类系统识别质量不同的疗养院的能力受到了阻碍。因此,作者怀疑许多疗养院绩效系统能否真正帮助消费者区分提供不同质量水平的疗养院。我们还认为,对于消费者而言,绩效评估模型在识别问题设施方面比识别潜在的优质疗养院更有效。
针对这些担忧,我们提出了一种比以往使用的方法更不雄心勃勃的疗养院绩效评估建议。我们相信,消费者使用一个更简单的系统能够做出更明智的选择,该系统旨在找出质量差的疗养院,而不是一个基于护理质量指标差异对数百个设施进行排名的系统,这些指标的重要性存疑。建议的绩效模型基于消费者联盟2006年疗养院质量监测器开发中使用的五项原则。
我们最好通过避免在网站或报告中展示某个城市、某个州或全国所有疗养院信息的报告系统来为政策制定者和消费者提供最佳服务。我们主张在工作中更加谦逊,专注于只识别潜在最差或最好的疗养院。然而,最终重要的是要记住,任何绩效评估网站或报告提供的信息都无法替代在一天中的不同时间多次亲自访问疗养院以评估质量。