Assessment of a Novel Hybrid Delphi and Nominal Groups Technique to Evaluate Quality Indicators

被引：24

作者：

Davies, Sheryl ^{[1
]}

Romano, Patrick S. ^{[2
]}

Schmidt, Eric M.

Schultz, Ellen

Geppert, Jeffrey J. ^{[3
]}

McDonald, Kathryn M.

机构：

[1] Stanford Univ, Ctr Primary Care & Outcomes Res, CHP PCOR, Stanford, CA 94305 USA

[2] Univ Calif Davis, Sch Med, Ctr Healthcare Policy & Res, Div Gen Med, Davis, CA 95616 USA

[3] Battelle Mem Inst, Centers Publ Hlth Res & Evaluat, Sacramento, CA USA

来源：

HEALTH SERVICES RESEARCH | 2011年 / 46卷 / 06期

基金：

美国医疗保健研究与质量局;

关键词：

Quality indicators; Delphi method; Nominal Group technique; CONSENSUS METHODS; UNITED-STATES; HEALTH-CARE; CHILDREN; SURGERY;

D O I：

10.1111/j.1475-6773.2011.01297.x

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：

Objective. To test the implementation of a novel structured panel process in the evaluation of quality indicators. Data Source. National panel of 64 clinicians rating usefulness of indicator applications in 2008-2009. Study Design. Hybrid panel combined Delphi Group and Nominal Group (NG) techniques to evaluate 81 indicator applications. Principal Findings. The Delphi Group and NG rated 56 percent of indicator applications similarly. Group assignment (Delphi versus Nominal) was not significantly associated with mean ratings, but specialty and research interests of panelists, and indicator factors such as denominator level and proposed use were. Rating distributions narrowed significantly in 20.8 percent of applications between review rounds. Conclusions. The hybrid panel process facilitated information exchange and tightened rating distributions. Future assessments of this method might include a control panel.

引用

页码：2005 / 2018

页数：14

共 31 条

[1]

Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality ( AHRQ), 2003, GUID PAT SAF IND

[2]

Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality ( AHRQ), 2002, MEAS PAT SAF BAS HOS

[3]

Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality ( AHRQ), 2006, MEAS PED HLTH CAR QU

[4]

Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ), 2002, GUID INP QUAL IND QU

[5]

Asch SM, 2002, PUBLIC HEALTH REP, V117, P157, DOI 10.1093/phr/117.2.157

[6] A new approach for measuring quality of care for women with hypertension [J].

Asch, SM ;

Kerr, EA ;

Lapuerta, P ;

Law, A ;

McGlynn, EA .

ARCHIVES OF INTERNAL MEDICINE, 2001, 161 (10) :1329-1335

[7] Hospitalization for ambulatory care-sensitive conditions: A method for comparative access and quality studies using routinely collected statistics [J].

Brown, AD ;

Goldacre, MJ ;

Hicks, N ;

Rourke, JT ;

McMurtry, RY ;

Brown, JD ;

Anderson, GM .

CANADIAN JOURNAL OF PUBLIC HEALTH-REVUE CANADIENNE DE SANTE PUBLIQUE, 2001, 92 (02) :155-159

[8] How do stakeholder groups vary in a Delphi technique about primary mental health care and what factors influence their ratings? [J].

Campbell, SM ;

Shield, T ;

Rogers, A ;

Gask, L .

QUALITY & SAFETY IN HEALTH CARE, 2004, 13 (06) :428-434

[9] Research methods used in developing and applying quality indicators in primary care [J].

Campbell, SM ;

Braspenning, J ;

Hutchinson, A ;

Marshall, M .

QUALITY & SAFETY IN HEALTH CARE, 2002, 11 (04) :358-364

[10] Prescribing indicators for UK general practice: Delphi consultation study [J].

Campbell, SM ;

Cantrill, JA ;

Roberts, D .

BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL, 2000, 321 (7258) :425-428B

← 1 2 3 4 →