• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

综合血液透析中心评估的结局加权。

Outcomes weighting for comprehensive haemodialysis centre assessment.

机构信息

Servicio de Nefrología, Hospital Reina Sofía de Tudela, Tudela, Navarra, Spain.

出版信息

Nefrologia. 2012;32(5):659-63. doi: 10.3265/Nefrologia.pre2012.Jun.11426.

DOI:10.3265/Nefrologia.pre2012.Jun.11426
PMID:23013953
Abstract

BACKGROUND

At present, there is no adequate system available for evaluating dialysis centres.

OBJECTIVES

To construct an overall haemodialysis results weighting system, acceptable to the different stakeholders involved which allows the comparison of centres using a compound marker.

METHOD

The Quality Management Work Group of the Spanish Society of Nephrology (WG) established a set of preselected indicators. A Focus Group, independent of the WG, was established. It was made up of nine individuals: three patients, three clinicians and three clinical managers, who assessed these indicators using an approved methodology and established the selected indicators. Finally, the indicators were weighted through three weighting stages, each separated by two debate periods, which involved the distribution of 100 points between each variable, according to the personal assessment and the debate sustained.

RESULTS

The clinical results included: haemodialysis doses, anaemia, plasma calcium and phosphorus, type of vascular access, and hospitalisation days. The weighting given to each variable following the third weighting process, expressed as an average of all the factors, was as follows: clinical results 38.9; annual mortality 25.0; satisfaction with the centre 12.2; health-related quality of life 15.6; and cost 8.3 (total 100).

CONCLUSIONS

The weighting structure covers relevant and overall results and includes the opinion of all stakeholders involved; all of which will increase its acceptability and widespread use and contribute to the analysis of the value produced by the centres and the improvement of the results.

摘要

背景

目前,尚无评估透析中心的充分系统。

目的

构建一个整体血液透析结果加权系统,让不同利益相关者接受,使用复合指标比较中心。

方法

西班牙肾脏病学会(WG)质量管理工作组确定了一组预选指标。成立了一个独立于 WG 的焦点小组,由九名成员组成:三名患者、三名临床医生和三名临床经理,他们使用经过批准的方法评估这些指标,并确定选定的指标。最后,通过三个加权阶段对指标进行加权,每个阶段之间有两个辩论期,根据个人评估和辩论,在每个变量之间分配 100 分。

结果

临床结果包括:血液透析剂量、贫血、血浆钙和磷、血管通路类型和住院天数。经过第三次加权处理后,每个变量的加权平均值如下:临床结果 38.9;年死亡率 25.0;对中心的满意度 12.2;健康相关生活质量 15.6;成本 8.3(总计 100)。

结论

加权结构涵盖了相关和整体结果,并包含了所有利益相关者的意见;这将提高其可接受性和广泛使用,并有助于分析中心产生的价值和改善结果。

相似文献

1
Outcomes weighting for comprehensive haemodialysis centre assessment.综合血液透析中心评估的结局加权。
Nefrologia. 2012;32(5):659-63. doi: 10.3265/Nefrologia.pre2012.Jun.11426.
2
Appendix to dialysis centre guidelines: recommendations for the relationship between outpatient haemodialysis centres and reference hospitals. Opinions from the Outpatient Dialysis Group. Grupo de Trabajo de Hemodiálisis Extrahospitalaria.附录:透析中心指南:门诊血液透析中心与参考医院之间关系的建议。来自门诊透析组的意见。
Nefrologia. 2011;31(6):664-9. doi: 10.3265/Nefrologia.pre2011.Oct.11001.
3
Variability in quality of care among dialysis units in western Switzerland.瑞士西部透析单位之间护理质量的差异。
Nephrol Dial Transplant. 2005 Sep;20(9):1854-63. doi: 10.1093/ndt/gfh972. Epub 2005 Jul 5.
4
Assessing value-based health care delivery for haemodialysis.评估血液透析的基于价值的医疗服务提供情况。
J Eval Clin Pract. 2017 Jun;23(3):477-485. doi: 10.1111/jep.12483. Epub 2015 Dec 11.
5
Evaluation of dialysis centres: values and criteria of the stakeholders.透析中心评估:利益相关者的价值观和标准。
BMC Health Serv Res. 2020 Apr 14;20(1):297. doi: 10.1186/s12913-020-05085-w.
6
[Quality assurance and certification of a hemodialysis unit according to the ISO-9001-2000 standards].[依据ISO - 9001 - 2000标准对血液透析单元进行质量保证与认证]
Nefrologia. 2003;23(1):37-46.
7
[Hemodialysis prospective multicentric quality study].
Nefrologia. 2006;26(6):688-94.
8
[Quality guide in nephrology and dialysis].
G Ital Nefrol. 2004 May-Jun;21(3):267-75.
9
[Efficiency versus quality in the NHS, in Portugal: methodologies for evaluation].葡萄牙国民医疗服务体系中的效率与质量:评估方法
Acta Med Port. 2008 Sep-Oct;21(5):397-410. Epub 2009 Jan 16.
10
Effect of a quality improvement strategy on several haemodialysis outcomes.
Nephrol Dial Transplant. 2008 Sep;23(9):2943-7. doi: 10.1093/ndt/gfn116. Epub 2008 Mar 27.

引用本文的文献

1
Continuous quality improvement in nephrology: a systematic review.肾脏病学的持续质量改进:一项系统综述。
BMC Nephrol. 2016 Nov 24;17(1):190. doi: 10.1186/s12882-016-0389-1.
2
Assessing value-based health care delivery for haemodialysis.评估血液透析的基于价值的医疗服务提供情况。
J Eval Clin Pract. 2017 Jun;23(3):477-485. doi: 10.1111/jep.12483. Epub 2015 Dec 11.