Suppr超能文献

医院间护理质量指标的差异:系统评价。

Between-hospital variation in indicators of quality of care: a systematic review.

机构信息

Department of Public Health, Erasmus MC, Rotterdam, The Netherlands

Erasmus Universiteit Rotterdam, Erasmus School of Health Policy and Management, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.

出版信息

BMJ Qual Saf. 2024 Jun 19;33(7):443-455. doi: 10.1136/bmjqs-2023-016726.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Efforts to mitigate unwarranted variation in the quality of care require insight into the 'level' (eg, patient, physician, ward, hospital) at which observed variation exists. This systematic literature review aims to synthesise the results of studies that quantify the extent to which hospitals contribute to variation in quality indicator scores.

METHODS

Embase, Medline, Web of Science, Cochrane and Google Scholar were systematically searched from 2010 to November 2023. We included studies that reported a measure of between-hospital variation in quality indicator scores relative to total variation, typically expressed as a variance partition coefficient (VPC). The results were analysed by disease category and quality indicator type.

RESULTS

In total, 8373 studies were reviewed, of which 44 met the inclusion criteria. Casemix adjusted variation was studied for multiple disease categories using 144 indicators, divided over 5 types: intermediate clinical outcomes (n=81), final clinical outcomes (n=35), processes (n=10), patient-reported experiences (n=15) and patient-reported outcomes (n=3). In addition to an analysis of between-hospital variation, eight studies also reported physician-level variation (n=54 estimates). In general, variation that could be attributed to hospitals was limited (median VPC=3%, IQR=1%-9%). Between-hospital variation was highest for process indicators (17.4%, 10.8%-33.5%) and lowest for final clinical outcomes (1.4%, 0.6%-4.2%) and patient-reported outcomes (1.0%, 0.9%-1.5%). No clear pattern could be identified in the degree of between-hospital variation by disease category. Furthermore, the studies exhibited limited attention to the reliability of observed differences in indicator scores.

CONCLUSION

Hospital-level variation in quality indicator scores is generally small relative to residual variation. However, meaningful variation between hospitals does exist for multiple indicators, especially for care processes which can be directly influenced by hospital policy. Quality improvement strategies are likely to generate more impact if preceded by level-specific and indicator-specific analyses of variation, and when absolute variation is also considered.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42022315850.

摘要

背景

为了减轻医疗服务质量方面不必要的差异,需要深入了解观察到的差异存在于哪个“层面”(例如患者、医生、病房、医院)。本系统文献综述旨在综合研究量化医院对质量指标评分差异程度的结果。

方法

从 2010 年到 2023 年 11 月,我们系统地检索了 Embase、Medline、Web of Science、Cochrane 和 Google Scholar 数据库。我们纳入了报告质量指标评分的医院间差异相对于总变异程度的研究,通常用方差分解系数(VPC)表示。根据疾病类别和质量指标类型对结果进行分析。

结果

共审查了 8373 项研究,其中 44 项符合纳入标准。使用 144 个指标研究了多个疾病类别的病例组合调整后变异,分为 5 种类型:中间临床结局(n=81)、最终临床结局(n=35)、过程(n=10)、患者报告的体验(n=15)和患者报告的结果(n=3)。除了对医院间变异进行分析外,8 项研究还报告了医生层面的变异(n=54 项估计)。总体而言,归因于医院的变异是有限的(中位数 VPC=3%,IQR=1%-9%)。过程指标的医院间变异最高(17.4%,10.8%-33.5%),最终临床结局和患者报告的结果最低(1.4%,0.6%-4.2%)和患者报告的结果(1.0%,0.9%-1.5%)。按疾病类别划分,医院间变异程度没有明显的模式。此外,研究对指标评分观察到的差异的可靠性关注有限。

结论

与剩余变异相比,质量指标评分的医院间变异通常较小。然而,对于多个指标,尤其是可以直接受到医院政策影响的护理过程,医院间确实存在有意义的变异。如果在进行差异的特定层面和特定指标的分析之前,以及在考虑绝对变异的情况下,采用质量改进策略,可能会产生更大的影响。

PROSPERO 注册号:CRD42022315850。

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