Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Quality Indicators in Cranial Neurosurgery: Which Are Presently Substantiated? A Systematic Review.
Schipmann, Stephanie; Schwake, Michael; Suero Molina, Eric; Roeder, Norbert; Steudel, Wolf-Ingo; Warneke, Nils; Stummer, Walter.
Afiliação
  • Schipmann S; Department of Neurosurgery, University Hospital Muenster, Muenster, Germany. Electronic address: stephanie.schipmann@ukmuenster.de.
  • Schwake M; Department of Neurosurgery, University Hospital Muenster, Muenster, Germany.
  • Suero Molina E; Department of Neurosurgery, University Hospital Muenster, Muenster, Germany.
  • Roeder N; Diagnosis-Related Group Research Group, University Hospital Muenster, Muenster, Germany.
  • Steudel WI; Department of Neurosurgery, Saarland University Medical Center and Saarland University Faculty of Medicine, Homburg, Germany.
  • Warneke N; Department of Neurosurgery, University Hospital Muenster, Muenster, Germany.
  • Stummer W; Department of Neurosurgery, University Hospital Muenster, Muenster, Germany.
World Neurosurg ; 104: 104-112, 2017 Aug.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28465269
ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND:

Owing to the rising costs of health care delivery, the quality of delivered care has become a central issue across all medical specialties. Consequently, there is increasing pressure to create standardized frameworks for measuring quality of care. In the field of cranial neurosurgery, health care administrators have begun applying quality measures that are easily available but might be inaccurate in measuring the quality of care.

METHODS:

We performed a systematic literature review on quality indicators (QIs) that are presently used in this field, aiming to elucidate which QIs are scientifically founded and thus potentially justifiable as measures of quality. We found a total of 8 QIs, and methodologically evaluated published studies according to the AIRE (Appraisal of Indicators through Research and Evaluation) criteria. These criteria include length of hospital stay, all-cause readmission rate, and unplanned reoperation rate.

RESULTS:

Our review indicates that these presently used or proposed QIs for neurosurgery lack scientific rigor and are restricted to rudimentary measures, and that further research is necessary.

CONCLUSIONS:

Neurosurgeons need to define their own QIs and actively participate in the validation of these QIs to provide the best possible patient outcomes. More reliable clinical registries, obligatory for all neurosurgical services, should be established as a basis for establishing such indicators, with risk adjustment being an important element of any such indicators.
Assuntos
Palavras-chave

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Readmissão do Paciente / Garantia da Qualidade dos Cuidados de Saúde / Indicadores de Qualidade em Assistência à Saúde / Craniotomia / Tempo de Internação Tipo de estudo: Systematic_reviews Limite: Humans Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2017 Tipo de documento: Article

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Readmissão do Paciente / Garantia da Qualidade dos Cuidados de Saúde / Indicadores de Qualidade em Assistência à Saúde / Craniotomia / Tempo de Internação Tipo de estudo: Systematic_reviews Limite: Humans Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2017 Tipo de documento: Article