Wiig Siri, Aase Karina, von Plessen Christian, Burnett Susan, Nunes Francisco, Weggelaar Anne Marie, Anderson-Gare Boel, Calltorp Johan, Fulop Naomi
Department of Health Studies, University of Stavanger, N-4036 Stavanger, Norway.
BMC Health Serv Res. 2014 Oct 11;14:478. doi: 10.1186/1472-6963-14-478.
Conceptualization of quality of care - in terms of what individuals, groups and organizations include in their meaning of quality, is an unexplored research area. It is important to understand how quality is conceptualised as a means to successfully implement improvement efforts and bridge potential disconnect in language about quality between system levels, professions, and clinical services. The aim is therefore to explore and compare conceptualization of quality among national bodies (macro level), senior hospital managers (meso level), and professional groups within clinical micro systems (micro level) in a cross-national study.
This cross-national multi-level case study combines analysis of national policy documents and regulations at the macro level with semi-structured interviews (383) and non-participant observation (803 hours) of key meetings and shadowing of staff at the meso and micro levels in ten purposively sampled European hospitals (England, the Netherlands, Portugal, Sweden, and Norway). Fieldwork at the meso and micro levels was undertaken over a 12-month period (2011-2012) and different types of micro systems were included (maternity, oncology, orthopaedics, elderly care, intensive care, and geriatrics).
The three quality dimensions clinical effectiveness, patient safety, and patient experience were incorporated in macro level policies in all countries. Senior hospital managers adopted a similar conceptualization, but also included efficiency and costs in their conceptualization of quality. 'Quality' in the forms of measuring indicators and performance management were dominant among senior hospital managers (with clinical and non-clinical background). The differential emphasis on the three quality dimensions was strongly linked to professional roles, personal ideas, and beliefs at the micro level. Clinical effectiveness was dominant among physicians (evidence-based approach), while patient experience was dominant among nurses (patient-centered care, enough time to talk with patients). Conceptualization varied between micro systems depending on the type of services provided.
The quality conceptualization differed across system levels (macro-meso-micro), among professional groups (nurses, doctors, managers), and between the studied micro systems in our ten sampled European hospitals. This entails a managerial alignment challenge translating macro level quality definitions into different local contexts.
护理质量的概念化——就个人、群体和组织在其质量含义中所包含的内容而言,是一个尚未被探索的研究领域。了解质量是如何被概念化的,对于成功实施改进措施以及弥合系统层面、专业领域和临床服务之间在质量语言上的潜在脱节至关重要。因此,本跨国研究的目的是探索和比较国家机构(宏观层面)、医院高级管理人员(中观层面)以及临床微观系统内的专业群体(微观层面)对质量的概念化。
本跨国多层次案例研究将宏观层面的国家政策文件和法规分析与对10家有目的地抽样的欧洲医院(英国、荷兰、葡萄牙、瑞典和挪威)中观和微观层面的关键会议进行的半结构化访谈(383次)、非参与观察(803小时)以及对工作人员的跟踪观察相结合。中观和微观层面的实地调查在12个月期间(2011 - 2012年)进行,纳入了不同类型的微观系统(产科、肿瘤科、骨科、老年护理、重症监护和老年病科)。
临床有效性、患者安全和患者体验这三个质量维度在所有国家的宏观层面政策中都有体现。医院高级管理人员采用了类似的概念化,但在其质量概念化中也纳入了效率和成本。在医院高级管理人员(具有临床和非临床背景)中,以测量指标和绩效管理形式出现的“质量”占主导地位。对这三个质量维度的不同强调与微观层面的专业角色、个人观念和信念密切相关。临床有效性在医生中占主导地位(基于证据的方法),而患者体验在护士中占主导地位(以患者为中心的护理,有足够时间与患者交谈)。概念化因所提供服务类型的不同而在微观系统之间有所差异。
在我们抽样的10家欧洲医院中,质量概念化在系统层面(宏观 - 中观 - 微观)、专业群体(护士、医生、管理人员)之间以及所研究的微观系统之间存在差异。这带来了将宏观层面的质量定义转化为不同当地背景的管理协调挑战。