Jiang H Joanna, Lockee Carlin, Bass Karma, Fraser Irene
Center for Delivery, Organization and Markets, Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, Rockville, Maryland, USA.
J Healthc Manag. 2009 Jan-Feb;54(1):15-29; discussion 29-30.
In response to legal and accreditation mandates as well as pressures from purchasers and consumers for quality improvement, hospital governing boards seek to improve their oversight of quality of care by adopting various practices. Based on a previous survey of hospital presidents/chief executive officers, this study examines differences in hospital quality performance associated with the adoption of particular practices in board oversight of quality. Quality was measured by performance in process of care and risk-adjusted mortality, using the Hospital Compare data from the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services and the Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project inpatient databases of the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. Board practices found to be associated with better performance in both process of care and mortality include (1) having a board quality committee; (2) establishing strategic goals for quality improvement; (3) being involved in setting the quality agenda for the hospital; (4) including a specific item on quality in board meetings; (5) using a dashboard with national benchmarks that includes indicators for clinical quality, patient safety, and patient satisfaction; and (6) linking senior executives' performance evaluation to quality and patient safety indicators. Involvement of physician leadership in the board quality committee further enhanced the hospital's quality performance. Taken together, these findings seem to support the will-execution-constancy of purpose framework on improving the effectiveness of hospital boards in overseeing quality. Future study should examine how specific board practices influence the culture and operations of the hospital that lead to better quality of care.
为响应法律和认证要求以及购买者和消费者对质量改进的压力,医院管理委员会试图通过采取各种措施来加强对医疗质量的监督。基于之前对医院院长/首席执行官的调查,本研究考察了在质量监督方面采取特定措施与医院质量绩效之间的差异。质量通过医疗过程中的绩效和风险调整后的死亡率来衡量,使用医疗保险和医疗补助服务中心的医院比较数据以及医疗保健研究与质量局的医疗成本和利用项目住院数据库。研究发现,在医疗过程和死亡率方面表现较好的委员会措施包括:(1)设立一个委员会质量委员会;(2)制定质量改进的战略目标;(3)参与制定医院的质量议程;(4)在董事会会议上列入质量方面的特定议题;(5)使用包含临床质量、患者安全和患者满意度指标且有国家基准对比的仪表盘;(6)将高级管理人员的绩效评估与质量和患者安全指标挂钩。医师领导参与委员会质量委员会进一步提升了医院的质量绩效。综合来看,这些发现似乎支持了关于提高医院董事会监督质量有效性的意愿 - 执行 - 目标一致性框架。未来的研究应考察特定的董事会措施如何影响医院的文化和运营从而带来更好的医疗质量。