Suppr超能文献

放射学中的质量测量:文献系统综述与放射学效益管理团体调查

Quality Measurements in Radiology: A Systematic Review of the Literature and Survey of Radiology Benefit Management Groups.

作者信息

Narayan Anand, Cinelli Christina, Carrino John A, Nagy Paul, Coresh Josef, Riese Victoria G, Durand Daniel J

机构信息

Johns Hopkins Hospital, Baltimore, Maryland.

Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts.

出版信息

J Am Coll Radiol. 2015 Nov;12(11):1173-81.e23. doi: 10.1016/j.jacr.2015.06.038. Epub 2015 Sep 11.

Abstract

PURPOSE

As the US health care system transitions toward value-based reimbursement, there is an increasing need for metrics to quantify health care quality. Within radiology, many quality metrics are in use, and still more have been proposed, but there have been limited attempts to systematically inventory these measures and classify them using a standard framework. The purpose of this study was to develop an exhaustive inventory of public and private sector imaging quality metrics classified according to the classic Donabedian framework (structure, process, and outcome).

METHODS

A systematic review was performed in which eligibility criteria included published articles (from 2000 onward) from multiple databases. Studies were double-read, with discrepancies resolved by consensus. For the radiology benefit management group (RBM) survey, the six known companies nationally were surveyed. Outcome measures were organized on the basis of standard categories (structure, process, and outcome) and reported using Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines.

RESULTS

The search strategy yielded 1,816 citations; review yielded 110 reports (29 included for final analysis). Three of six RBMs (50%) responded to the survey; the websites of the other RBMs were searched for additional metrics. Seventy-five unique metrics were reported: 35 structure (46%), 20 outcome (27%), and 20 process (27%) metrics. For RBMs, 35 metrics were reported: 27 structure (77%), 4 process (11%), and 4 outcome (11%) metrics. The most commonly cited structure, process, and outcome metrics included ACR accreditation (37%), ACR Appropriateness Criteria (85%), and peer review (95%), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Imaging quality metrics are more likely to be structural (46%) than process (27%) or outcome (27%) based (P < .05). As national value-based reimbursement programs increasingly emphasize outcome-based metrics, radiologists must keep pace by developing the data infrastructure required to collect outcome-based quality metrics.

摘要

目的

随着美国医疗保健系统向基于价值的报销模式转变,对量化医疗保健质量的指标需求日益增加。在放射学领域,许多质量指标正在使用,并且还有更多指标被提出,但系统梳理这些指标并使用标准框架对其进行分类的尝试有限。本研究的目的是根据经典的唐纳贝蒂安框架(结构、过程和结果),编制一份详尽的公共和私营部门影像质量指标清单。

方法

进行了一项系统综述,纳入标准包括来自多个数据库的已发表文章(2000年起)。研究进行了双人阅读,分歧通过共识解决。对于放射学效益管理集团(RBM)调查,对全国六家知名公司进行了调查。结果指标根据标准类别(结构、过程和结果)进行组织,并按照系统评价和Meta分析的首选报告项目指南进行报告。

结果

检索策略产生了1816条引文;综述得到110份报告(29份纳入最终分析)。六家RBM中有三家(50%)回复了调查;对其他RBM的网站进行搜索以获取更多指标。共报告了75个独特的指标:35个结构指标(46%)、20个结果指标(27%)和20个过程指标(27%)。对于RBM,报告了35个指标:27个结构指标(77%)、4个过程指标(11%)和4个结果指标(11%)。最常被引用的结构、过程和结果指标分别包括美国放射学会(ACR)认证(37%)、ACR适宜性标准(85%)和同行评审(95%)。

结论

影像质量指标基于结构的可能性更大(46%),而基于过程(27%)或结果(27%)的可能性较小(P <.05)。随着全国基于价值的报销计划越来越强调基于结果的指标,放射科医生必须通过开发收集基于结果的质量指标所需的数据基础设施来跟上步伐。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验