调整卫生保健质量平衡

Annette E Carruthers MBBS (HONS), FRACGP, David A Jeacocke MBBS, M MED SCI, FRACGP
{"title":"调整卫生保健质量平衡","authors":"Annette E Carruthers MBBS (HONS), FRACGP,&nbsp;David A Jeacocke MBBS, M MED SCI, FRACGP","doi":"10.1046/j.1440-1762.2000.00383.x","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p> <b>Abstract</b> In an increasingly informed society there has been a growing interest by consumers in evaluating the quality-of-care provided by their practitioners. This task is complicated by an asymmetry in the technical knowledge required to assess health-care quality between consumers and health providers. Recently attempts have been made to incorporate patient views into the assessment of quality to try and address this asymmetry. A number of quality initiatives have been developed to help provide consumers with markers of practitioner competency including professional training programmes and examinations, quality standards and quality assurance activities. International trends include federal funding for quality improvement activities within practices, and greater use of information technology to provide error warning systems for practitioners, to monitor practice patterns, and to promote better communication of information between health services. It is important in developing these new initiatives that ‘symmetrical’ approaches which capture consumers’ views on quality are employed.</p>","PeriodicalId":79407,"journal":{"name":"Journal of quality in clinical practice","volume":"20 4","pages":"158-160"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2008-06-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1046/j.1440-1762.2000.00383.x","citationCount":"3","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Adjusting the balance in health-care quality\",\"authors\":\"Annette E Carruthers MBBS (HONS), FRACGP,&nbsp;David A Jeacocke MBBS, M MED SCI, FRACGP\",\"doi\":\"10.1046/j.1440-1762.2000.00383.x\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p> <b>Abstract</b> In an increasingly informed society there has been a growing interest by consumers in evaluating the quality-of-care provided by their practitioners. This task is complicated by an asymmetry in the technical knowledge required to assess health-care quality between consumers and health providers. Recently attempts have been made to incorporate patient views into the assessment of quality to try and address this asymmetry. A number of quality initiatives have been developed to help provide consumers with markers of practitioner competency including professional training programmes and examinations, quality standards and quality assurance activities. International trends include federal funding for quality improvement activities within practices, and greater use of information technology to provide error warning systems for practitioners, to monitor practice patterns, and to promote better communication of information between health services. It is important in developing these new initiatives that ‘symmetrical’ approaches which capture consumers’ views on quality are employed.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":79407,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of quality in clinical practice\",\"volume\":\"20 4\",\"pages\":\"158-160\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2008-06-28\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1046/j.1440-1762.2000.00383.x\",\"citationCount\":\"3\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of quality in clinical practice\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1046/j.1440-1762.2000.00383.x\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of quality in clinical practice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1046/j.1440-1762.2000.00383.x","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

摘要

摘要在一个信息日益灵通的社会中,消费者对评估医生提供的医疗质量越来越感兴趣。由于消费者和保健提供者之间评估保健质量所需的技术知识不对称,这项任务变得复杂。最近已经尝试将病人的观点纳入质量评估,试图解决这种不对称。政府已推行多项质素措施,向消费者提供从业员能力的标志,包括专业培训计划和考试、质素标准和质素保证活动。国际趋势包括联邦政府为实践中的质量改进活动提供资金,更多地利用信息技术为从业者提供错误警报系统,监测实践模式,并促进卫生服务之间更好的信息交流。在开发这些新举措时,采用“对称”方法捕捉消费者对质量的看法非常重要。
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
Adjusting the balance in health-care quality

Abstract In an increasingly informed society there has been a growing interest by consumers in evaluating the quality-of-care provided by their practitioners. This task is complicated by an asymmetry in the technical knowledge required to assess health-care quality between consumers and health providers. Recently attempts have been made to incorporate patient views into the assessment of quality to try and address this asymmetry. A number of quality initiatives have been developed to help provide consumers with markers of practitioner competency including professional training programmes and examinations, quality standards and quality assurance activities. International trends include federal funding for quality improvement activities within practices, and greater use of information technology to provide error warning systems for practitioners, to monitor practice patterns, and to promote better communication of information between health services. It is important in developing these new initiatives that ‘symmetrical’ approaches which capture consumers’ views on quality are employed.

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
Health technology assessment. Notices Letters to the Editor Notices Author index
×
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