社论:效率、有效性和生产力——在医疗保健中被广泛使用,但经常被误解

Ajit Kumar
{"title":"社论:效率、有效性和生产力——在医疗保健中被广泛使用,但经常被误解","authors":"Ajit Kumar","doi":"10.1108/ijqss-09-2023-190","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"According to the World Health Organization, healthcare is a system that consists of subsystems, organizes people, institutions and resources and delivers healthcare services to meet the health needs of target populations (Braithwaite et al., 2020). The three key elements of a system or subsystem are inputs, processes and outputs (Cusins, 1994). For instance, a hospital is a subsystem of a healthcare system consisting of inputs, processes and outputs. Input is the resources, such as human, capital, material, tools and information, required in an organization. Output is health services. The inputs are transformed by carrying out different activities and procedures to give output. These different activities and procedures are known as processes. Efficiency, effectiveness and productivity are key performance indicators (KPIs) widely used when discussing any healthcare system or subsystem (Evans et al., 2001). It is desirable that the healthcare system should be efficient, effective and productive (Street and Häkkinen, 2009). These three KPIs are related but have different concepts. An enormous amount of literature is available to define and differentiate these terms (Burches and Burches, 2020). However, it can be seen in the medical literature that they are used interchangeably (Lodge, 1991). For instance, Kao et al. (1995) explained, “Efficiency refers to the ratio of outputs and inputs, effectiveness refers to the extent to which outputs align with predetermined goals. Productivity refers to the sum of both efficiency and effectiveness.” Very clearly, the definition of productivity is flawed. The author of this paper tries to explain these terms using an illustrative diagram (Figure 1). Most of the explanations in this study are built upon two already-published research papers. They are:","PeriodicalId":14403,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Quality and Service Sciences","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-08-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Editorial: Efficiency, effectiveness, and productivity – widely used, but often misunderstood in healthcare\",\"authors\":\"Ajit Kumar\",\"doi\":\"10.1108/ijqss-09-2023-190\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"According to the World Health Organization, healthcare is a system that consists of subsystems, organizes people, institutions and resources and delivers healthcare services to meet the health needs of target populations (Braithwaite et al., 2020). The three key elements of a system or subsystem are inputs, processes and outputs (Cusins, 1994). For instance, a hospital is a subsystem of a healthcare system consisting of inputs, processes and outputs. Input is the resources, such as human, capital, material, tools and information, required in an organization. Output is health services. The inputs are transformed by carrying out different activities and procedures to give output. These different activities and procedures are known as processes. Efficiency, effectiveness and productivity are key performance indicators (KPIs) widely used when discussing any healthcare system or subsystem (Evans et al., 2001). It is desirable that the healthcare system should be efficient, effective and productive (Street and Häkkinen, 2009). These three KPIs are related but have different concepts. An enormous amount of literature is available to define and differentiate these terms (Burches and Burches, 2020). However, it can be seen in the medical literature that they are used interchangeably (Lodge, 1991). For instance, Kao et al. (1995) explained, “Efficiency refers to the ratio of outputs and inputs, effectiveness refers to the extent to which outputs align with predetermined goals. Productivity refers to the sum of both efficiency and effectiveness.” Very clearly, the definition of productivity is flawed. The author of this paper tries to explain these terms using an illustrative diagram (Figure 1). Most of the explanations in this study are built upon two already-published research papers. They are:\",\"PeriodicalId\":14403,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal of Quality and Service Sciences\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-08-07\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Journal of Quality and Service Sciences\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1108/ijqss-09-2023-190\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"MANAGEMENT\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Quality and Service Sciences","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/ijqss-09-2023-190","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MANAGEMENT","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

根据世界卫生组织的说法,医疗保健是一个由子系统组成的系统,它组织人员、机构和资源,并提供医疗保健服务,以满足目标人群的健康需求(Braithwaite等人,2020)。系统或子系统的三个关键要素是输入、过程和输出(Cusins,1994)。例如,医院是医疗保健系统的一个子系统,由输入、过程和输出组成。投入是一个组织所需的资源,如人力、资本、材料、工具和信息。产出是卫生服务。通过执行不同的活动和程序来转换输入,以提供输出。这些不同的活动和程序被称为过程。效率、有效性和生产力是在讨论任何医疗保健系统或子系统时广泛使用的关键绩效指标(KPI)(Evans等人,2001)。医疗保健系统应该是高效、有效和富有成效的(Street和Häkkinen,2009)。这三个KPI是相关的,但有不同的概念。大量文献可用于定义和区分这些术语(Burches和Burches,2020)。然而,从医学文献中可以看出,它们可以互换使用(Lodge,1991)。例如,Kao等人(1995)解释道,“效率是指产出和投入的比率,有效性是指产出与预定目标的一致程度。生产力是指效率和有效性的总和。”很明显,生产力的定义是有缺陷的。本文的作者试图用一个图解来解释这些术语(图1)。本研究中的大多数解释都建立在两篇已经发表的研究论文的基础上。它们是:
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
Editorial: Efficiency, effectiveness, and productivity – widely used, but often misunderstood in healthcare
According to the World Health Organization, healthcare is a system that consists of subsystems, organizes people, institutions and resources and delivers healthcare services to meet the health needs of target populations (Braithwaite et al., 2020). The three key elements of a system or subsystem are inputs, processes and outputs (Cusins, 1994). For instance, a hospital is a subsystem of a healthcare system consisting of inputs, processes and outputs. Input is the resources, such as human, capital, material, tools and information, required in an organization. Output is health services. The inputs are transformed by carrying out different activities and procedures to give output. These different activities and procedures are known as processes. Efficiency, effectiveness and productivity are key performance indicators (KPIs) widely used when discussing any healthcare system or subsystem (Evans et al., 2001). It is desirable that the healthcare system should be efficient, effective and productive (Street and Häkkinen, 2009). These three KPIs are related but have different concepts. An enormous amount of literature is available to define and differentiate these terms (Burches and Burches, 2020). However, it can be seen in the medical literature that they are used interchangeably (Lodge, 1991). For instance, Kao et al. (1995) explained, “Efficiency refers to the ratio of outputs and inputs, effectiveness refers to the extent to which outputs align with predetermined goals. Productivity refers to the sum of both efficiency and effectiveness.” Very clearly, the definition of productivity is flawed. The author of this paper tries to explain these terms using an illustrative diagram (Figure 1). Most of the explanations in this study are built upon two already-published research papers. They are:
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
CiteScore
6.00
自引率
7.70%
发文量
21
期刊介绍: The International Journal of Quality and Service Sciences seeks to explore various aspects of quality and services as closely interrelated phenomena in the context of ongoing transformation processes of organizations and societies. Thus the journals'' scope is not limited to micro perspectives of organizational and management related issues. It seeks further to explore patterns, behaviors, processes, mechanisms, principles and consequences related to quality and services in a broad range of organizational and social/global processes. These processes embrace cultural, economic, social, environmental and even global dimensions in order to better understand the past, to better diagnose the current situations and hence to design better the future. The journal seeks to embrace a holistic view of quality and service sector management and explicitly promotes the emerging field of ‘quality and service sciences’.The journal is an open forum and one of the main channels for communication of multi- and inter- disciplinary research and practices.
期刊最新文献
Elevating service startup survival through strategic service quality Quality leadership, technology integration and patient care quality across countries: moderating roles of national culture and infrastructure development After-sales service and brand reputation: a case of kitchen appliance industry After-sales service and brand reputation: a case of kitchen appliance industry Brand addiction: Wow! or woe?
×
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