Monitoring equity in the delivery of health services: a Delphi process to select healthcare equity indicators.

IF 2.1 4区 医学 Q2 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL Swiss medical weekly Pub Date : 2024-10-03 DOI:10.57187/s.3714
Clement P Buclin, Moreno Doninelli, Laura Bertini, Patrick Bodenmann, Stéphane Cullati, Arnaud Chiolero, Adriana Degiorgi, Armin Gemperli, Olivier Hugli, Anne Jachmann, Yves Jackson, Joachim Marti, Kevin Morisod, Katrina A Obas, Florian Rüter, Judith Safford, Javier Sanchis-Zozaya, Matthis Schick, Francesca Giuliani, Delphine S Courvoisier
{"title":"Monitoring equity in the delivery of health services: a Delphi process to select healthcare equity indicators.","authors":"Clement P Buclin, Moreno Doninelli, Laura Bertini, Patrick Bodenmann, Stéphane Cullati, Arnaud Chiolero, Adriana Degiorgi, Armin Gemperli, Olivier Hugli, Anne Jachmann, Yves Jackson, Joachim Marti, Kevin Morisod, Katrina A Obas, Florian Rüter, Judith Safford, Javier Sanchis-Zozaya, Matthis Schick, Francesca Giuliani, Delphine S Courvoisier","doi":"10.57187/s.3714","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Aims of the study: </strong>Health equity is a key component of quality of care and an objective for a growing number of quality improvement projects for deontological, ethical, public health and economic reasons. To monitor equity in the delivery of health services in Switzerland, there is a need to implement valid, measurable and actionable equity indicators, along with vulnerability stratifiers such as migrant status, which could lead to differences in quality of care. The aim of this study was to develop a set of healthcare equity indicators and stratifiers targeting inpatient and outpatient populations and to test their feasibility.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A scoping literature review and inputs from a national interprofessional expert taskforce provided a set of indicators and vulnerability stratifiers. The most valid and measurable indicators and stratifiers were retained using a Delphi process. They were then operationalised, and their implementation tested in three Swiss hospitals from the three language regions.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A taskforce of 18 experts, including a patient representative, selected 11 indicators that evaluate structures, processes and outcomes, and five vulnerability stratifiers. Although most indicators and stratifiers could be implemented in all three hospitals, data availability was limited for some variables, including patient satisfaction and access to interpreters for foreign-language patients.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The equity indicators and stratifiers identified by this two-stage process have content validity, wide patient coverage and are focused on inequities in the healthcare system that are actionable through improvement projects. Both the indicators and the project methodology could be replicated in institutions aiming for more equitable care.</p>","PeriodicalId":22111,"journal":{"name":"Swiss medical weekly","volume":"154 ","pages":"3714"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Swiss medical weekly","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.57187/s.3714","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Aims of the study: Health equity is a key component of quality of care and an objective for a growing number of quality improvement projects for deontological, ethical, public health and economic reasons. To monitor equity in the delivery of health services in Switzerland, there is a need to implement valid, measurable and actionable equity indicators, along with vulnerability stratifiers such as migrant status, which could lead to differences in quality of care. The aim of this study was to develop a set of healthcare equity indicators and stratifiers targeting inpatient and outpatient populations and to test their feasibility.

Methods: A scoping literature review and inputs from a national interprofessional expert taskforce provided a set of indicators and vulnerability stratifiers. The most valid and measurable indicators and stratifiers were retained using a Delphi process. They were then operationalised, and their implementation tested in three Swiss hospitals from the three language regions.

Results: A taskforce of 18 experts, including a patient representative, selected 11 indicators that evaluate structures, processes and outcomes, and five vulnerability stratifiers. Although most indicators and stratifiers could be implemented in all three hospitals, data availability was limited for some variables, including patient satisfaction and access to interpreters for foreign-language patients.

Conclusions: The equity indicators and stratifiers identified by this two-stage process have content validity, wide patient coverage and are focused on inequities in the healthcare system that are actionable through improvement projects. Both the indicators and the project methodology could be replicated in institutions aiming for more equitable care.

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
监测医疗服务提供的公平性:选择医疗公平指标的德尔菲程序。
研究目的:健康公平是医疗质量的一个关键组成部分,也是越来越多的质量改进项目出于道义、伦理、公共卫生和经济原因而设定的目标。为监测瑞士医疗服务的公平性,有必要实施有效、可衡量和可操作的公平性指标,以及可能导致医疗质量差异的脆弱性分层因素,如移民身份。本研究旨在制定一套针对住院和门诊病人的医疗公平指标和分层指标,并测试其可行性:方法:通过范围界定文献综述和全国跨专业专家工作组的意见,提出了一套指标和脆弱性分层。通过德尔菲法(Delphi process)保留了最有效、最可测量的指标和分层因子。随后,这些指标和分层法被付诸实施,并在瑞士三个语区的三家医院进行了测试:由包括一名患者代表在内的 18 名专家组成的工作组选出了 11 项评估结构、流程和结果的指标,以及 5 项脆弱性分层指标。尽管大多数指标和分层因素可在所有三家医院实施,但某些变量的数据可用性有限,包括患者满意度和外语患者获得翻译服务的情况:通过这两个阶段的过程确定的公平指标和分层指标具有内容有效性、广泛的患者覆盖面,并且重点关注医疗系统中的不公平现象,可通过改进项目加以实施。这些指标和项目方法都可以在旨在提供更公平医疗服务的机构中推广。
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
Swiss medical weekly
Swiss medical weekly 医学-医学:内科
CiteScore
5.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
期刊介绍: The Swiss Medical Weekly accepts for consideration original and review articles from all fields of medicine. The quality of SMW publications is guaranteed by a consistent policy of rigorous single-blind peer review. All editorial decisions are made by research-active academics.
期刊最新文献
Enhancing interprofessional ward rounds by identifying factors associated with low satisfaction and efficiency: a quantitative and qualitative national survey of Swiss healthcare professionals. Outcomes of coronary artery aneurysms: insights from the Coronary Artery Ectasia and Aneurysm Registry (CAESAR). Economic evaluation in the treatment of unruptured intracranial aneurysms in the Swiss healthcare system: a retrospective cost evaluation. Improving sex and gender equity in research protocols: the new SAGER-swissethics recommendations. Patient and public involvement in academic clinical research in Switzerland - a mixed methods study.
×
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