Methods for the guideline-based development of quality indicators-a systematic review

被引:193
作者
Koetter, Thomas [1 ,2 ]
Blozik, Eva [1 ]
Scherer, Martin [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Med Ctr Hamburg Eppendorf, Dept Primary Med Care, Hamburg, Germany
[2] Univ Lubeck, Inst Social Med, Lubeck, Germany
关键词
CLINICAL-PERFORMANCE MEASURES; MEASURES WRITING COMMITTEE; COLLEGE-OF-CARDIOLOGY; HEART-ASSOCIATION; HEALTH-CARE; DIABETES-MELLITUS; TRACT-INFECTIONS; TASK-FORCE; CRITERIA; REHABILITATION;
D O I
10.1186/1748-5908-7-21
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
Background: Quality indicators (QIs) are used in many healthcare settings to measure, compare, and improve quality of care. For the efficient development of high-quality QIs, rigorous, approved, and evidence-based development methods are needed. Clinical practice guidelines are a suitable source to derive QIs from, but no gold standard for guideline-based QI development exists. This review aims to identify, describe, and compare methodological approaches to guideline-based QI development. Methods: We systematically searched medical literature databases (Medline, EMBASE, and CINAHL) and grey literature. Two researchers selected publications reporting methodological approaches to guideline-based QI development. In order to describe and compare methodological approaches used in these publications, we extracted detailed information on common steps of guideline-based QI development (topic selection, guideline selection, extraction of recommendations, QI selection, practice test, and implementation) to predesigned extraction tables. Results: From 8,697 hits in the database search and several grey literature documents, we selected 48 relevant references. The studies were of heterogeneous type and quality. We found no randomized controlled trial or other studies comparing the ability of different methodological approaches to guideline-based development to generate high-quality QIs. The relevant publications featured a wide variety of methodological approaches to guideline-based QI development, especially regarding guideline selection and extraction of recommendations. Only a few studies reported patient involvement. Conclusions: Further research is needed to determine which elements of the methodological approaches identified, described, and compared in this review are best suited to constitute a gold standard for guideline-based QI development. For this research, we provide a comprehensive groundwork.
引用
收藏
页数:22
相关论文
共 70 条
[1]  
Advani Aneel, 2003, AMIA Annu Symp Proc, P11
[2]  
AHRQ, 1995, US CLIN PRACT GUID E, V2
[4]  
[Anonymous], 1995, Qual Lett Healthc Lead, V7, P21
[5]  
[Anonymous], BMC PREGNANCY CHILDB, DOI DOI 10.1186/1471-2393-8-28
[6]  
[Anonymous], 2009, Systematic Reviews-CRDs guidance for undertaking reviews in health care
[7]  
[Anonymous], 2010, ALLG METH RAHM SEKT
[8]  
AZQ (Arztliches Zentrum fur Qualitat in der Medizin), 2009, QUAL MAN AUT NEUK MA
[9]   DEVELOPMENT OF REVIEW CRITERIA - LINKING GUIDELINES AND ASSESSMENT OF QUALITY [J].
BAKER, R ;
FRASER, RC .
BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL, 1995, 311 (7001) :370-373
[10]  
Bergman D A, 1999, Pediatrics, V103, P225