Measuring quality of care: considering conceptual approaches to quality indicator development and evaluation
- PMID: 24018342
- DOI: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2013.05.017
Measuring quality of care: considering conceptual approaches to quality indicator development and evaluation
Abstract
Objective: In this article, we describe one approach for developing and evaluating quality indicators.
Study design and setting: We focus on describing different conceptual approaches to quality indicator development, review one approach for developing quality indicators, outline how to evaluate quality indicators once developed, and discuss quality indicator maintenance.
Results: The key steps for developing quality indicators include specifying a clear goal for the indicators; using methodologies to incorporate evidence, expertise, and patient perspectives; and considering contextual factors and logistics of implementation. The Strategic Framework Board and the National Quality Measure Clearinghouse have developed criteria for evaluating quality indicators that complement traditional psychometric evaluations. Optimal strategies for quality indicator maintenance and dissemination have not been determined, but experiences with clinical guideline maintenance may be informative.
Conclusion: For quality indicators to effectively guide quality improvement efforts, they must be developed, evaluated, maintained, and implemented using rigorous evidence-informed practices.
Keywords: Consensus; Health care; Models; Quality indicators; Quality of health care; Reproducibility of results; Theoretical.
Copyright © 2013 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Comment in
-
Quality indicators and performance measures: methods for development need more standardization.J Clin Epidemiol. 2013 Dec;66(12):1338-9. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2013.06.012. Epub 2013 Sep 7. J Clin Epidemiol. 2013. PMID: 24018346 No abstract available.
-
The right indicator for the job: different levels of rigor may be appropriate for the development of quality indicators. Comment on Stelfox and Straus.J Clin Epidemiol. 2014 Sep;67(9):963-4. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2014.03.001. Epub 2014 Apr 29. J Clin Epidemiol. 2014. PMID: 24786596 No abstract available.
-
Letter reply to Kris Doggen et al.: The right indicator for the job: different levels of rigor may be appropriate for the development of quality indicators.J Clin Epidemiol. 2014 Sep;67(9):964-5. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2014.02.022. Epub 2014 May 15. J Clin Epidemiol. 2014. PMID: 24837297 No abstract available.
Publication types
MeSH terms
Grants and funding
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources
