Review and analyze various approaches to performance measurement in health care, demonstrating the value of provider-initiated performance measurement in which ongoing monitoring of both processes and outcomes of care coupled with the use of clinical guidelines enhances performance improvement efforts.
Describe some of the issues and findings associated with the use of such a methodology in prostate cancer care.
Literature review and case study.
There are a number of significant limitations in the use of a « report card » methodology to improve quality and efficiency in health care.
The complementary approach of combining « instrument panels » and clinical guidelines within an overall continuous quality improvement framework appears to have resulted in improved clinical outomes and reduced costs in a six-physician urology group located in a heavily managed-care penetrated market.
Performance measurement tools are integral to efforts to improve outcomes and efficiency in health care.
Providers of care might consider adapting the kind of performance improvement methodology described in this article.
Practice benefits including improved clinical and economic outcomes are likely to follow.
Mots-clés Pascal : Adénocarcinome, Prostate, Traitement, Résultat, Effet secondaire, Complication, Analyse avantage coût, Evaluation performance, Homme, Tumeur maligne, Appareil urinaire pathologie, Appareil génital mâle pathologie, Prostate pathologie
Mots-clés Pascal anglais : Adenocarcinoma, Prostate, Treatment, Result, Secondary effect, Complication, Cost benefit analysis, Performance evaluation, Human, Malignant tumor, Urinary system disease, Male genital diseases, Prostate disease
Notice produite par :
Inist-CNRS - Institut de l'Information Scientifique et Technique
Cote : 96-0186978
Code Inist : 002B30A03B. Création : 199608.