Haller Guy, Stoelwinder Johannes, Myles Paul S, McNeil John
Department of Anesthesia, Pharmacology and Intensive Care, Geneva University Hospital, Geneva, Switzerland.
Anesthesiology. 2009 May;110(5):1158-75. doi: 10.1097/ALN.0b013e3181a1093b.
Clinical indicators are increasingly developed and promoted by professional organizations, governmental agencies, and quality initiatives as measures of quality and performance. To clarify the number, characteristics, and validity of indicators available for anesthesia care, the authors performed a systematic review. They identified 108 anesthetic clinical indicators, of which 53 related also to surgical or postoperative ward care. Most were process (42%) or outcome (57%) measures assessing the safety and effectiveness of patient care. To identify possible quality issues, most clinical indicators were used as part of interhospital comparison or professional peer-review processes. For 60% of the clinical indicators identified, validity relied on expert opinion. The level of scientific evidence on which prescriptive indicators ("how things should be done") were based was high (1a-1b) for 38% and low (4-5) for 62% of indicators. Additional efforts should be placed into the development and validation of anesthesia-specific quality indicators.
临床指标正越来越多地由专业组织、政府机构以及质量改进计划作为质量和绩效的衡量标准来开发和推广。为了阐明可用于麻醉护理的指标数量、特征和有效性,作者进行了一项系统评价。他们识别出108项麻醉临床指标,其中53项也与外科手术或术后病房护理相关。大多数指标是评估患者护理安全性和有效性的过程(42%)或结果(57%)指标。为了识别可能的质量问题,大多数临床指标被用作医院间比较或专业同行评审过程的一部分。对于所识别的60%的临床指标,有效性依赖专家意见。规定性指标(“事情应该如何做”)所基于的科学证据水平,38%的指标为高(1a - 1b级),62%的指标为低(4 - 5级)。应进一步努力开发和验证麻醉特定的质量指标。