Suppr超能文献

估算门诊医疗组织质量改进的成本:一种实用方法。

Estimating costs of quality improvement for outpatient healthcare organisations: a practical methodology.

作者信息

Brown Sydney E S, Chin Marshall H, Huang Elbert S

机构信息

Section of General Internal Medicine and the Diabetes Research and Training Center, Pritzker School of Medicine, University of Chicago, Chicago, Illinois 60637, USA.

出版信息

Qual Saf Health Care. 2007 Aug;16(4):248-51. doi: 10.1136/qshc.2006.019232.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Outpatient healthcare organisations worldwide participate in quality improvement (QI) programmes. Despite the importance of understanding the financial impact of such programmes, there are no established standard methods for empirically assessing QI programme costs and their consequences for small outpatient healthcare organisations.

OBJECTIVE AND METHODS

The costs and cost consequences were evaluated for a diabetes QI programme implemented throughout the USA in federally qualified community health centres. For five case study centres, survey instruments and methods for data analysis were developed.

RESULTS

Two types of cost/revenue were evaluated. Direct costs/revenues, such as personnel time, items purchased and grants received, were evaluated using self-administered surveys. Cost/revenue consequences, which were cost/revenue changes that may have occurred due to changes in patient utilisation or physician behaviour, were evaluated using electronic billing data. Other methods for evaluating cost/revenue consequences if electronic billing data are not available are also discussed.

CONCLUSION

This paper describes a practical taxonomy and method for assessing the costs and revenues of QI programmes for outpatient organisations. Results of such analyses will be useful for healthcare organisations implementing QI programmes and also for policy makers designing incentives for QI participation.

摘要

背景

全球范围内的门诊医疗组织都参与质量改进(QI)项目。尽管了解此类项目的财务影响很重要,但目前尚无既定的标准方法来实证评估QI项目的成本及其对小型门诊医疗组织的影响。

目的与方法

对美国各地联邦合格社区健康中心实施的糖尿病QI项目的成本及成本影响进行评估。针对五个案例研究中心,开发了调查工具和数据分析方法。

结果

评估了两种类型的成本/收入。直接成本/收入,如人员时间、采购物品和获得的补助金,通过自行填写的调查问卷进行评估。成本/收入影响,即可能因患者利用率或医生行为变化而发生的成本/收入变化,使用电子计费数据进行评估。还讨论了在没有电子计费数据的情况下评估成本/收入影响的其他方法。

结论

本文描述了一种实用的分类法和方法,用于评估门诊组织QI项目的成本和收入。此类分析结果将有助于实施QI项目的医疗组织,也有助于为鼓励参与QI项目而设计激励措施的政策制定者。

相似文献

1
Estimating costs of quality improvement for outpatient healthcare organisations: a practical methodology.
Qual Saf Health Care. 2007 Aug;16(4):248-51. doi: 10.1136/qshc.2006.019232.
2
The cost consequences of improving diabetes care: the community health center experience.
Jt Comm J Qual Patient Saf. 2008 Mar;34(3):138-46. doi: 10.1016/s1553-7250(08)34016-1.
3
The fall and rise of cost sharing in Kenya: the impact of phased implementation.
Health Policy Plan. 1996 Mar;11(1):52-63. doi: 10.1093/heapol/11.1.52.
4
Local cost sharing in Bamako Initiative systems in Benin and Guinea: assuring the financial viability of primary health care.
Int J Health Plann Manage. 1997 Jun;12 Suppl 1:S109-35. doi: 10.1002/(sici)1099-1751(199706)12:1+<s109::aid-hpm468>3.3.co;2-7.
6
8
The cost-effectiveness of improving diabetes care in U.S. federally qualified community health centers.
Health Serv Res. 2007 Dec;42(6 Pt 1):2174-93; discussion 2294-323. doi: 10.1111/j.1475-6773.2007.00734.x.
9
Quality improvement strategies for diabetes care: Effects on outcomes for adults living with diabetes.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2023 May 31;5(5):CD014513. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD014513.
10
The value of electronic health records in community health centers: policy implications.
Health Aff (Millwood). 2007 Jan-Feb;26(1):206-14. doi: 10.1377/hlthaff.26.1.206.

引用本文的文献

1
How to Design and Write Your Quality Improvement Study for Publication: Pearls and Pitfalls.
Neurol Clin Pract. 2025 Feb;15(1):e200419. doi: 10.1212/CPJ.0000000000200419. Epub 2024 Dec 11.
4
5
The "catalyst to better diabetes care act of 2007".
J Diabetes Sci Technol. 2008 Mar;2(2):175-7. doi: 10.1177/193229680800200201.

本文引用的文献

1
The cost consequences of improving diabetes care: the community health center experience.
Jt Comm J Qual Patient Saf. 2008 Mar;34(3):138-46. doi: 10.1016/s1553-7250(08)34016-1.
2
The cost-effectiveness of improving diabetes care in U.S. federally qualified community health centers.
Health Serv Res. 2007 Dec;42(6 Pt 1):2174-93; discussion 2294-323. doi: 10.1111/j.1475-6773.2007.00734.x.
3
Early experience with pay-for-performance: from concept to practice.
JAMA. 2005 Oct 12;294(14):1788-93. doi: 10.1001/jama.294.14.1788.
4
Meta-analysis: chronic disease self-management programs for older adults.
Ann Intern Med. 2005 Sep 20;143(6):427-38. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-143-6-200509200-00007.
5
The insufficiency of evidence to establish the business case for quality.
Int J Qual Health Care. 2005 Aug;17(4):347-55. doi: 10.1093/intqhc/mzi034. Epub 2005 Mar 23.
6
Linking physicians' pay to the quality of care--a major experiment in the United kingdom.
N Engl J Med. 2004 Sep 30;351(14):1448-54. doi: 10.1056/NEJMhpr041294.
8
The quality of health care delivered to adults in the United States.
N Engl J Med. 2003 Jun 26;348(26):2635-45. doi: 10.1056/NEJMsa022615.
9
The business case for quality: case studies and an analysis.
Health Aff (Millwood). 2003 Mar-Apr;22(2):17-30. doi: 10.1377/hlthaff.22.2.17.
10
Markets and medicine: barriers to creating a "business case for quality".
Perspect Biol Med. 2003 Winter;46(1):38-51; discussion 52-4. doi: 10.1353/pbm.2003.0001.

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验