Review article: what makes a good healthcare quality indicator? A systematic review and validation study.

Show simple item record

dc.contributor.author Jones, Peter en
dc.contributor.author Shepherd, Michael en
dc.contributor.author Wells, Linda en
dc.contributor.author Le Fevre, James en
dc.contributor.author Ameratunga, Shanthi en
dc.date.accessioned 2018-10-16T21:36:26Z en
dc.date.issued 2014-04 en
dc.identifier.issn 1742-6731 en
dc.identifier.uri http://hdl.handle.net/2292/42084 en
dc.description.abstract Indicators measuring aspects of performance to assess quality of care are often chosen arbitrarily. The present study aimed to determine what should be considered when selecting healthcare quality indicators, particularly focusing on the application to emergency medicine. Structured searches of electronic databases were supplemented by website searches of quality of care and benchmarking organisations, citation searches and discussions with experts. Candidate attributes of 'good' healthcare indicators were extracted independently by two authors. The validity of each attribute was independently assessed by 16 experts in quality of care and emergency medicine. Valid and reliable attributes were included in a critical appraisal tool for healthcare quality indicators, which was piloted by emergency medicine specialists. Twenty-three attributes were identified, and all were rated moderate to extremely important by an expert panel. The reliability was high: alpha = 0.98. Twelve existing tools explicitly stated a median (range) of 14 (8-17) attributes. A critical appraisal tool incorporating all the attributes was developed. This was piloted by four emergency medicine specialists who were asked to appraise and rank a set of six candidate indicators. Although using the tool took more time than implicit gestalt decision making: median (interquartile range) 190 (43-352) min versus 17.5 (3-34) min, their rankings changed after using the tool. To inform the appraisal of quality improvement indicators for emergency medicine, a comprehensive list of indicator attributes was identified, validated, developed into a tool and piloted. Although expert consensus is still required, this tool provides an explicit basis for discussions around indicator selection. en
dc.format.medium Print en
dc.language eng en
dc.relation.ispartofseries Emergency medicine Australasia : EMA en
dc.rights Items in ResearchSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated. Previously published items are made available in accordance with the copyright policy of the publisher. en
dc.rights.uri https://researchspace.auckland.ac.nz/docs/uoa-docs/rights.htm en
dc.subject Humans en
dc.subject Emergency Medicine en
dc.subject Quality of Health Care en
dc.subject Quality Indicators, Health Care en
dc.title Review article: what makes a good healthcare quality indicator? A systematic review and validation study. en
dc.type Journal Article en
dc.identifier.doi 10.1111/1742-6723.12195 en
pubs.issue 2 en
pubs.begin-page 113 en
pubs.volume 26 en
dc.rights.holder Copyright: The author en
dc.identifier.pmid 24707999 en
pubs.end-page 124 en
pubs.publication-status Published en
dc.rights.accessrights http://purl.org/eprint/accessRights/RestrictedAccess en
pubs.subtype Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't en
pubs.subtype Validation Studies en
pubs.subtype Review en
pubs.subtype Journal Article en
pubs.elements-id 434729 en
pubs.org-id Medical and Health Sciences en
pubs.org-id Population Health en
pubs.org-id Epidemiology & Biostatistics en
pubs.org-id School of Medicine en
pubs.org-id Surgery Department en
dc.identifier.eissn 1742-6723 en
pubs.record-created-at-source-date 2014-04-08 en
pubs.dimensions-id 24707999 en


Files in this item

There are no files associated with this item.

Find Full text

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record

Share

Search ResearchSpace


Browse

Statistics