Altan Defne, Ahuja Vanita, Kelleher Cassandra M, Chang David C
Department of Surgery, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA.
Department of Surgery, Veterans Affairs Connecticut Healthcare System, West Haven, CT.
Ann Surg Open. 2022 Jul 19;3(3):e184. doi: 10.1097/AS9.0000000000000184. eCollection 2022 Sep.
Over the past few decades, institutions have developed complex systems to compare themselves to others with the goal of improving healthcare quality. This process of comparison to others, called external benchmarking, has become the standard approach for quality improvement. However, external benchmarking is resource intensive, may not be flexible enough to focus on problems unique to individual institutions, and may lead to complacency for institutions ranking near the top of the quality bell curve for the measured metrics. Our singular focus on external benchmarking could also divert resources from other approaches. Here, we describe how the use of internal benchmarking, in which an institution focuses on improving their own processes over time, can offer unique advantages as well as offset the limitations of external benchmarking. We advocate for investment in both internal and external benchmarking as complimentary tools to improve healthcare quality.
在过去几十年里,各机构已开发出复杂系统,以便与其他机构进行比较,目的是提高医疗质量。这种与其他机构进行比较的过程,即所谓的外部基准评估,已成为质量改进的标准方法。然而,外部基准评估资源密集,可能不够灵活,无法专注于个别机构特有的问题,而且可能导致处于所测指标质量钟形曲线顶端附近的机构自满。我们对外部基准评估的单一关注也可能使资源从其他方法中转移。在此,我们描述了内部基准评估的使用方式,即一个机构随着时间推移专注于改进自身流程,它如何能提供独特优势并弥补外部基准评估的局限性。我们主张将内部和外部基准评估都作为提高医疗质量的补充工具进行投资。