跨越式安全措施和磁体标识的检验

Teresa Wai Chi Tai PhD, MA, BA, Angela Mattie JD (Esq.), MPH, Stephanie Monteiro Miller PhD, Robert M. Yawson PhD, MPhil, MS
{"title":"跨越式安全措施和磁体标识的检验","authors":"Teresa Wai Chi Tai PhD, MA, BA,&nbsp;Angela Mattie JD (Esq.), MPH,&nbsp;Stephanie Monteiro Miller PhD,&nbsp;Robert M. Yawson PhD, MPhil, MS","doi":"10.1002/jhrm.21533","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Leapfrog Hospital Safety Grades and Magnet designation are two publicly available measures that serve as proxies for health care quality and safety. We examine whether hospitals with a better rating in one Leapfrog safety measure also have favorable ratings in other Leapfrog safety measures and whether Magnet-designated hospitals have better Leapfrog safety scores related to outcomes, processes, and structures than non-Magnet hospitals. Our study found that hospital-associated infections (HAIs) were not strongly correlated with one another, but Leapfrog safety process and structural measures were significantly and strongly correlated with one another, suggesting hospitals that invest in processes/structures to improve quality tend to do so across many dimensions. Also, Magnet-designated hospitals had higher Leapfrog grades for structural measures but not systematically better infection rates. Only one HAI (central line-associated bloodstream infections) had lower rates in Magnet hospitals than non-Magnet hospitals. These analyses suggest that improvements in process and structural measures do not necessarily translate into lower HAIs. Hospitals may need specific quality improvement strategies to target each HAI since HAIs are not strongly correlated with one another. Future research is needed to identify what process and structural measures can decrease HAIs and how this should be reflected in Magnet designation evaluation criteria.</p>","PeriodicalId":39819,"journal":{"name":"Journal of healthcare risk management : the journal of the American Society for Healthcare Risk Management","volume":"42 3-4","pages":"21-29"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-02-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"An examination of Leapfrog safety measures and Magnet designation\",\"authors\":\"Teresa Wai Chi Tai PhD, MA, BA,&nbsp;Angela Mattie JD (Esq.), MPH,&nbsp;Stephanie Monteiro Miller PhD,&nbsp;Robert M. Yawson PhD, MPhil, MS\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/jhrm.21533\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>Leapfrog Hospital Safety Grades and Magnet designation are two publicly available measures that serve as proxies for health care quality and safety. We examine whether hospitals with a better rating in one Leapfrog safety measure also have favorable ratings in other Leapfrog safety measures and whether Magnet-designated hospitals have better Leapfrog safety scores related to outcomes, processes, and structures than non-Magnet hospitals. Our study found that hospital-associated infections (HAIs) were not strongly correlated with one another, but Leapfrog safety process and structural measures were significantly and strongly correlated with one another, suggesting hospitals that invest in processes/structures to improve quality tend to do so across many dimensions. Also, Magnet-designated hospitals had higher Leapfrog grades for structural measures but not systematically better infection rates. Only one HAI (central line-associated bloodstream infections) had lower rates in Magnet hospitals than non-Magnet hospitals. These analyses suggest that improvements in process and structural measures do not necessarily translate into lower HAIs. Hospitals may need specific quality improvement strategies to target each HAI since HAIs are not strongly correlated with one another. Future research is needed to identify what process and structural measures can decrease HAIs and how this should be reflected in Magnet designation evaluation criteria.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":39819,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of healthcare risk management : the journal of the American Society for Healthcare Risk Management\",\"volume\":\"42 3-4\",\"pages\":\"21-29\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-02-27\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of healthcare risk management : the journal of the American Society for Healthcare Risk Management\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/jhrm.21533\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"Medicine\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of healthcare risk management : the journal of the American Society for Healthcare Risk Management","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/jhrm.21533","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

Leapfrog医院安全等级和Magnet指定是两种公开可用的措施,可作为医疗保健质量和安全的代理。我们研究在一项Leapfrog安全措施中评分较高的医院是否在其他Leapfrog安全措施中也有良好的评分,以及磁铁指定医院是否比非磁铁医院在结果、流程和结构方面具有更好的Leapfrog安全评分。我们的研究发现,医院相关感染(HAIs)彼此之间没有很强的相关性,但Leapfrog安全流程和结构措施彼此之间存在显著而强烈的相关性,这表明投资于流程/结构以提高质量的医院倾向于在多个维度上这样做。此外,磁体指定医院在结构措施上有更高的跨越性等级,但在系统上没有更好的感染率。只有一种HAI(中心静脉相关血流感染)在磁体医院的发生率低于非磁体医院。这些分析表明,过程和结构措施的改进不一定转化为较低的高质量指数。医院可能需要特定的质量改进策略来针对每种卫生保健指标,因为卫生保健指标之间的相关性并不强。未来的研究需要确定哪些过程和结构措施可以降低HAIs,以及如何将其反映在磁体设计评估标准中。
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
An examination of Leapfrog safety measures and Magnet designation

Leapfrog Hospital Safety Grades and Magnet designation are two publicly available measures that serve as proxies for health care quality and safety. We examine whether hospitals with a better rating in one Leapfrog safety measure also have favorable ratings in other Leapfrog safety measures and whether Magnet-designated hospitals have better Leapfrog safety scores related to outcomes, processes, and structures than non-Magnet hospitals. Our study found that hospital-associated infections (HAIs) were not strongly correlated with one another, but Leapfrog safety process and structural measures were significantly and strongly correlated with one another, suggesting hospitals that invest in processes/structures to improve quality tend to do so across many dimensions. Also, Magnet-designated hospitals had higher Leapfrog grades for structural measures but not systematically better infection rates. Only one HAI (central line-associated bloodstream infections) had lower rates in Magnet hospitals than non-Magnet hospitals. These analyses suggest that improvements in process and structural measures do not necessarily translate into lower HAIs. Hospitals may need specific quality improvement strategies to target each HAI since HAIs are not strongly correlated with one another. Future research is needed to identify what process and structural measures can decrease HAIs and how this should be reflected in Magnet designation evaluation criteria.

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
1.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
44
期刊介绍: The Journal of Healthcare Risk Management is published quarterly by the American Society for Healthcare Risk Management (ASHRM). The purpose of the journal is to publish research, trends, and new developments in the field of healthcare risk management with the ultimate goal of advancing safe and trusted patient-centered healthcare delivery and promoting proactive and innovative management of organization-wide risk. The journal focuses on insightful, peer-reviewed content that relates to patient safety, emergency preparedness, insurance, legal, leadership, and other timely healthcare risk management issues.
期刊最新文献
Haddon matrix model: Application to workplace violence in a hospital setting. Case law update. Creation of root cause analysis and action (RCA2) standard work by a multidisciplinary team to prevent harm, reduce bias, and improve safety culture. Streamlining incident reporting system: A lean approach to enhance patient and staff safety in a Middle Eastern prehospital emergency care setting. Humbled and honored.
×
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