Hershey N, Bontempo L C
University of Pittsburgh, PA 15261.
Qual Assur Util Rev. 1989 Nov;4(4):94-100. doi: 10.1177/0885713x8900400402.
The increased concern about the quality of medical services evidenced by, inter alia, the growing attention to quality of Peer Review Organizations. The purchasing and implementation of sophisticated medical data systems by hospitals, and the growing clamor from private health insurers and employers about the rapidly rising costs of health services has made determining the effectiveness of medical interventions a priority subject for many authorities in the field of medical care assessment. At the risk of oversimplification, the view that a greater focus on quality of health services is overdue has begun to energize healthcare institutions, the health professions, payers, and the general public. The objective of this paper and those that will follow is to examine medical peer review. Medical peer review involves peer appraisal in at least two stages: in criteria and standard setting (1, 2), and in determining whether criteria and standards have been met by practitioners in the rendering of services (2). This first article describes some difficulties with the information available to facilitate effective medical peer review, and examines the processes that provide the knowledge base upon which medical peer review depends.
对医疗服务质量的关注度不断提高，其中一个表现是对同行评审组织质量的关注度日益增加。医院购买并实施复杂的医疗数据系统，以及私人健康保险公司和雇主对医疗服务成本迅速上升的呼声越来越高，这使得确定医疗干预措施的有效性成为医疗评估领域许多权威机构的优先课题。冒着过度简化的风险，认为早就应该更加关注医疗服务质量的观点已经开始激励医疗机构、医疗行业、付款人和普通公众。本文以及后续文章的目的是审视医学同行评审。医学同行评审至少在两个阶段涉及同行评估：在标准制定阶段（1, 2），以及在确定从业者在提供服务时是否达到标准阶段（2）。第一篇文章描述了用于促进有效医学同行评审的现有信息存在的一些困难，并审视了为医学同行评审所依赖的知识库提供知识的过程。
