针对复杂问题的团队质量改进序列。

J Ovretveit
{"title":"针对复杂问题的团队质量改进序列。","authors":"J Ovretveit","doi":"10.1136/qshc.8.4.239","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>To solve complex quality problems teams need to follow a systematic sequence of inquiry and action. In this article a practical description of a team quality improvement sequence (TQIS) is given based on the experience of the more successful teams in the Norwegian total quality management experiment. There are nine phases in the sequence and teams have the flexibility to choose the best quality methods for completing each phase. The strengths of the framework are in ensuring that personnel time is used cost effectively and that changes are made which result in measurable improvement. One limitation is that the framework has not been as widely tested as FOCUS-PDCA (find, organise, clarify, understand, select-plan, do, check, act) and other frameworks to which the TQIS framework is compared. It is proposed that if team projects are to be the main vehicle for quality improvement, then their work must be made more cost effective. The article aims to stimulate research into the conditions necessary for different quality teams to be successful in health care, and draws on the research to propose a \"risk of team failure index\" to improve the management of such teams.</p>","PeriodicalId":20773,"journal":{"name":"Quality in health care : QHC","volume":"8 4","pages":"239-46"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1999-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1136/qshc.8.4.239","citationCount":"37","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A team quality improvement sequence for complex problems.\",\"authors\":\"J Ovretveit\",\"doi\":\"10.1136/qshc.8.4.239\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>To solve complex quality problems teams need to follow a systematic sequence of inquiry and action. In this article a practical description of a team quality improvement sequence (TQIS) is given based on the experience of the more successful teams in the Norwegian total quality management experiment. There are nine phases in the sequence and teams have the flexibility to choose the best quality methods for completing each phase. The strengths of the framework are in ensuring that personnel time is used cost effectively and that changes are made which result in measurable improvement. One limitation is that the framework has not been as widely tested as FOCUS-PDCA (find, organise, clarify, understand, select-plan, do, check, act) and other frameworks to which the TQIS framework is compared. It is proposed that if team projects are to be the main vehicle for quality improvement, then their work must be made more cost effective. The article aims to stimulate research into the conditions necessary for different quality teams to be successful in health care, and draws on the research to propose a \\\"risk of team failure index\\\" to improve the management of such teams.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":20773,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Quality in health care : QHC\",\"volume\":\"8 4\",\"pages\":\"239-46\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"1999-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1136/qshc.8.4.239\",\"citationCount\":\"37\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Quality in health care : QHC\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1136/qshc.8.4.239\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Quality in health care : QHC","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1136/qshc.8.4.239","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 37

摘要

为了解决复杂的质量问题,团队需要遵循系统的调查和行动顺序。本文根据挪威全面质量管理实验中较为成功的团队的经验,对团队质量改进序列(TQIS)进行了实际的描述。在这个序列中有九个阶段,团队可以灵活地选择最优质的方法来完成每个阶段。该框架的优势在于确保有效地利用人员时间,并确保所做的更改产生可衡量的改进。一个限制是,该框架没有像FOCUS-PDCA(发现、组织、澄清、理解、选择-计划、执行、检查、行动)和其他与TQIS框架相比较的框架那样得到广泛的测试。有人建议,如果团队项目是质量改进的主要载体,那么他们的工作必须更具成本效益。本文旨在激发对不同质量团队在医疗卫生领域取得成功的必要条件的研究,并在此基础上提出“团队失败风险指数”,以改进这类团队的管理。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
A team quality improvement sequence for complex problems.

To solve complex quality problems teams need to follow a systematic sequence of inquiry and action. In this article a practical description of a team quality improvement sequence (TQIS) is given based on the experience of the more successful teams in the Norwegian total quality management experiment. There are nine phases in the sequence and teams have the flexibility to choose the best quality methods for completing each phase. The strengths of the framework are in ensuring that personnel time is used cost effectively and that changes are made which result in measurable improvement. One limitation is that the framework has not been as widely tested as FOCUS-PDCA (find, organise, clarify, understand, select-plan, do, check, act) and other frameworks to which the TQIS framework is compared. It is proposed that if team projects are to be the main vehicle for quality improvement, then their work must be made more cost effective. The article aims to stimulate research into the conditions necessary for different quality teams to be successful in health care, and draws on the research to propose a "risk of team failure index" to improve the management of such teams.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Engaging patients in decisions: a challenge to health care delivery and public health. The extent of patients' understanding of the risk of treatments. Preferences and understanding their effects on health. Evidence-based patient empowerment. Performance management at the crossroads in the NHS: don't go into the red.
×
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