A framework for chronic care quality: results of a scoping review and Delphi survey

Grace Marie V. Ku, Willem Van De Put, Mohamed Ali Ag Ahmed, Deogratias Katsuva, Megumi Rosenberg Kano, Bruno Meessen
{"title":"A framework for chronic care quality: results of a scoping review and Delphi survey","authors":"Grace Marie V. Ku, Willem Van De Put, Mohamed Ali Ag Ahmed, Deogratias Katsuva, Megumi Rosenberg Kano, Bruno Meessen","doi":"10.1101/2024.08.21.24312364","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Frameworks conceptualising quality of care abound and vary; some concentrate on specific aspects (e.g., safety, access, effectiveness), others all-encompassing. However, to our knowledge, tailoring to systematically arrive at a comprehensive care for chronic conditions quality (CCCQ) framework has never been done. We conducted scoping review and Delphi survey to produce a CCCQ framework, comprehensively delineating aims, determinants and measurable attributes.\nWith the assumption that specific groups (people with chronic conditions, care providers, financiers, policy-makers, etc) view quality of care differently, we analysed 48 scientific and 26 grey literature deductively and inductively using the Institute of Medicine quality of care framework as the foundation. We produced a zero-version of the quality of chronic care framework, detailing aims, healthcare system determinants, and measurement mechanisms. This was presented in a Delphi survey to 49 experts with diverse chronic care expertise/experience around the world. Consensus was obtained after the first round, with the panel providing suggestions and justifications to expand the agreed-upon components. Through this exercise, a comprehensive CCCQ framework encompassing the journey through healthcare of people with chronic conditions was developed. The framework specifies seven CCCQ aims and identifies health system determinants which can be acted upon with organising principles and measured through chronic care quality attributes related to structures, processes and outcomes. Tailoring quality of care based on the nature of the diseases/conditions and considering different views can be done to ensure a comprehensive offer of healthcare services, and towards better outcomes that are acceptable to both the health system and PwCCs.","PeriodicalId":501556,"journal":{"name":"medRxiv - Health Systems and Quality Improvement","volume":"12 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"medRxiv - Health Systems and Quality Improvement","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1101/2024.08.21.24312364","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Frameworks conceptualising quality of care abound and vary; some concentrate on specific aspects (e.g., safety, access, effectiveness), others all-encompassing. However, to our knowledge, tailoring to systematically arrive at a comprehensive care for chronic conditions quality (CCCQ) framework has never been done. We conducted scoping review and Delphi survey to produce a CCCQ framework, comprehensively delineating aims, determinants and measurable attributes. With the assumption that specific groups (people with chronic conditions, care providers, financiers, policy-makers, etc) view quality of care differently, we analysed 48 scientific and 26 grey literature deductively and inductively using the Institute of Medicine quality of care framework as the foundation. We produced a zero-version of the quality of chronic care framework, detailing aims, healthcare system determinants, and measurement mechanisms. This was presented in a Delphi survey to 49 experts with diverse chronic care expertise/experience around the world. Consensus was obtained after the first round, with the panel providing suggestions and justifications to expand the agreed-upon components. Through this exercise, a comprehensive CCCQ framework encompassing the journey through healthcare of people with chronic conditions was developed. The framework specifies seven CCCQ aims and identifies health system determinants which can be acted upon with organising principles and measured through chronic care quality attributes related to structures, processes and outcomes. Tailoring quality of care based on the nature of the diseases/conditions and considering different views can be done to ensure a comprehensive offer of healthcare services, and towards better outcomes that are acceptable to both the health system and PwCCs.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
慢性病护理质量框架:范围界定审查和德尔菲调查的结果
将护理质量概念化的框架比比皆是,而且各不相同;有的侧重于特定方面(如安全性、可及性、有效性),有的则包罗万象。然而,据我们所知,还从未有人对慢性病综合护理质量(CCCQ)框架进行过系统的定制。基于特定群体(慢性病患者、医疗服务提供者、金融家、政策制定者等)对医疗质量的不同看法这一假设,我们以美国医学会医疗质量框架为基础,对 48 篇科学文献和 26 篇灰色文献进行了演绎和归纳分析。我们制定了零版慢性病护理质量框架,详细说明了目标、医疗保健系统决定因素和衡量机制。在德尔菲调查中,我们向全球 49 位具有不同慢性病护理专业知识/经验的专家介绍了这一框架。第一轮调查后达成了共识,专家小组提出了扩大商定内容的建议和理由。通过这项工作,制定了一个全面的 CCCQ 框架,涵盖了慢性病患者的医疗保健过程。该框架规定了七项 CCCQ 目标,并确定了医疗系统的决定因素,这些因素可根据组织原则采取行动,并通过与结构、流程和结果相关的慢性病护理质量属性进行衡量。可以根据疾病/病症的性质和不同的观点来调整护理质量,以确保提供全面的医疗保健服务,并取得医疗系统和慢性病患者都能接受的更好结果。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Effect of Monitoring and Evaluation Systems on the Performance of Neonatal Intensive Care Unit at Yumbe Regional referral hospital; A Pre-post quasi-experimental study design Plaintiff experiences of the medico-legal environment in Ireland “We’re here to help them if they want to come”: A qualitative exploration of hospital staff perceptions and experiences with outpatient non-attendance Improving Access and Efficiency of Acute Ischemic Stroke Treatment Across Four Canadian Provinces: A Stepped-Wedge Trial I am a quarterback: A mixed methods study of death investigators' communication with family members of young sudden cardiac death victims from suspected heritable causes
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1