Development of an outcomes management program at an academic medical center.

M Morris, S Jameson, S Murdock, D C Hohn
{"title":"Development of an outcomes management program at an academic medical center.","authors":"M Morris,&nbsp;S Jameson,&nbsp;S Murdock,&nbsp;D C Hohn","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>With the advent of managed care, academic medical centers have been challenged to lower costs and to document their claims of high quality outcomes. A successful method to achieve these objectives must not interfere with the academic missions of research and teaching. At M. D. Anderson Cancer Center, we initiated a program that would reduce practice variability and increase quality with a model that was familiar to the faculty.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Professional staff members were divided into disease site groups that included physicians, nurses, and other allied health staff. Each group developed practice guidelines and Collaborative Care Paths, based on evidence in the publications and on expert opinion. Desired outcomes were prospectively defined during this process. Before implementation, paths and guidelines underwent peer review.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The faculty actively participated in the development and implementation of the program that was viewed as a means of empowerment to deal with managed care. Nearly 1000 patients have been entered on the B8 paths that have been implemented to date.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>A physician-driven outcomes management program permits delivery of high quality care and supports outcomes research while decreasing cost in an academic setting.</p>","PeriodicalId":79476,"journal":{"name":"Best practices and benchmarking in healthcare : a practical journal for clinical and management application","volume":"1 3","pages":"118-25"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1996-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Best practices and benchmarking in healthcare : a practical journal for clinical and management application","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","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

Background: With the advent of managed care, academic medical centers have been challenged to lower costs and to document their claims of high quality outcomes. A successful method to achieve these objectives must not interfere with the academic missions of research and teaching. At M. D. Anderson Cancer Center, we initiated a program that would reduce practice variability and increase quality with a model that was familiar to the faculty.

Methods: Professional staff members were divided into disease site groups that included physicians, nurses, and other allied health staff. Each group developed practice guidelines and Collaborative Care Paths, based on evidence in the publications and on expert opinion. Desired outcomes were prospectively defined during this process. Before implementation, paths and guidelines underwent peer review.

Results: The faculty actively participated in the development and implementation of the program that was viewed as a means of empowerment to deal with managed care. Nearly 1000 patients have been entered on the B8 paths that have been implemented to date.

Conclusion: A physician-driven outcomes management program permits delivery of high quality care and supports outcomes research while decreasing cost in an academic setting.

分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
学术医疗中心成果管理项目的开发。
背景:随着管理式医疗的出现,学术医疗中心面临着降低成本和记录高质量结果的挑战。实现这些目标的成功方法不应干扰研究和教学的学术使命。在m.d.安德森癌症中心,我们启动了一个项目,它将减少实践的可变性,并通过一个教师熟悉的模型提高质量。方法:专业工作人员分为疾病现场组,包括医生、护士和其他专职卫生人员。每个小组都根据出版物中的证据和专家意见制定了实践指南和协作护理路径。在此过程中,预期的结果被前瞻性地定义。在实施之前,路径和指导方针经过同行评审。结果:教师积极参与了该项目的开发和实施,该项目被视为一种授权处理管理式医疗的手段。迄今为止,已有近1000名患者进入了B8路径。结论:医生驱动的结果管理程序允许提供高质量的护理,并支持结果研究,同时降低学术环境中的成本。
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
Measuring patient satisfaction in healthcare organizations: qualitative and quantitative approaches. Clinical risk modification, quality, and patient safety: interrelationships, problems, and future potential. Disease management: Lovelace Health Systems episodes of care--a case study. Technology assessment in healthcare: a review and description of a "best practice" technology assessment process. Academic health center teaching hospitals in transition: a perspective from the field.
×
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