Consensus methods to identify a set of potential performance indicators for systems of emergency and urgent care

被引:25
作者
Coleman, Patricia [1 ]
Nicholl, Jon [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Sheffield, Med Care Res Unit, Sheffield S1 4DA, S Yorkshire, England
关键词
DELPHI; INTERFACE; TRIAL; TIMES;
D O I
10.1258/jhsrp.2009.009096
中图分类号
R19 [保健组织与事业(卫生事业管理)];
学科分类号
摘要
Objectives: To identify a comprehensive set of indicators to enable Primary Care Trust (PCT) commissioners in England and other NHS decision-makers to monitor the performance of systems of emergency and urgent care for which they are responsible. Methods: Using a combination of Delphi RAND methods in three successive rounds of consultation and nominal group review, we canvassed expert opinion on 70 potential indicators as good measures of system performance. The two Delphi panels consisted of senior clinicians and researchers, and urgent care leads and commissioners in PCTs and Strategic Health Authorities (SHAs). The indicators were formatted into a questionnaire according to whether they were outcome, process, structure, or equity-based measures. Participants scored each indicator on a Likert scale of 1-9 and had the opportunity to consider their scores informed by the group scores and feedback. The questionnaire was refined after each round. To ensure that the indicators rated most highly by the Delphi panels covered all dimensions of performance, the results of the Delphi were reviewed by a nominal group consisting of two researchers and three clinicians from the local health services research network (LHSR). Results: Overall, the process yielded 16 candidate indicators. It also produced a core set of serious, emergency and urgent care-sensitive conditions (defined as conditions whose exacerbations should be managed by a well-performing system without admission to an inpatient bed), for use with the indicators. Conclusions: System-wide measures to monitor performance across multiple services should encourage providers to work for patient benefit in an integrated way. They will also assist commissioners to monitor and improve emergency and urgent care for their local populations. The indicators are now being calculated using routinely available data, and tested for their responsiveness to capture change over time.
引用
收藏
页码:12 / 18
页数:7
相关论文
共 23 条
  • [11] Targets and moving goal posts: changes in waiting times in a UK emergency department
    Locker, T
    Mason, S
    Wardrope, J
    Walters, S
    [J]. EMERGENCY MEDICINE JOURNAL, 2005, 22 (10) : 710 - 714
  • [12] Mitroff I.I., 1975, DELPHI METHOD, P17
  • [13] NICHOLL J, 2009, MED CAR RES UN PROGR
  • [14] Randomised controlled trial of a shared care programme for newly referred cancer patients: bridging the gap between general practice and hospital
    Nielsen, JD
    Palshof, T
    Mainz, J
    Jensen, AB
    Olesen, F
    [J]. QUALITY & SAFETY IN HEALTH CARE, 2003, 12 (04): : 263 - 272
  • [15] Methodology matters - VIII - Eliciting expert opinion using the Delphi technique: identifying performance indicators for cardiovascular disease
    Normand, SLT
    McNeil, BJ
    Peterson, LE
    Palmer, RH
    [J]. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL FOR QUALITY IN HEALTH CARE, 1998, 10 (03) : 247 - 260
  • [16] Characteristics of the emergency and urgent care system important to patients: a qualitative study
    O'Cathain, Alicia
    Coleman, Patricia
    Nicholl, Jon
    [J]. JOURNAL OF HEALTH SERVICES RESEARCH & POLICY, 2008, 13 : 19 - 25
  • [17] Pencheon D., 2008, The good indicators guide: understanding how to use and choose indicators
  • [18] Left in limbo: patients' views on care across the primary/secondary interface
    Preston, C
    Cheater, F
    Baker, R
    Hearnshaw, H
    [J]. QUALITY IN HEALTH CARE, 1999, 8 (01): : 16 - 21
  • [19] Treating the clock and not the patient: ambulance response times and risk
    Price, L
    [J]. QUALITY & SAFETY IN HEALTH CARE, 2006, 15 (02): : 127 - 130
  • [20] Measuring "goodness" in individuals and healthcare systems
    Pringle, M
    Wilson, T
    Grol, R
    [J]. BMJ-BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL, 2002, 325 (7366): : 704 - 707