دورية أكاديمية
[Reliability of peer review-like dialogue in the German statutory quality assurance program].
| العنوان: | [Reliability of peer review-like dialogue in the German statutory quality assurance program]. |
|---|---|
| عنوان ترانسليتريتد: | Reliabilität des Strukturierten Dialogs in der gesetzlich verpflichtenden Qualitätssicherung. |
| المؤلفون: | Boywitt D; Institut für Qualitätssicherung und Transparenz im Gesundheitswesen (IQTIG), Berlin, Deutschland. Electronic address: dennis.boywitt@iqtig.org., Kähler M; Institut für Qualitätssicherung und Transparenz im Gesundheitswesen (IQTIG), Berlin, Deutschland., Bungard S; Institut für Qualitätssicherung und Transparenz im Gesundheitswesen (IQTIG), Berlin, Deutschland., Höhle M; Institut für Qualitätssicherung und Transparenz im Gesundheitswesen (IQTIG), Berlin, Deutschland; Institut für Mathematik und Informatik, Universität Greifswald, Greifswald, Deutschland., Rauh J; Institut für Qualitätssicherung und Transparenz im Gesundheitswesen (IQTIG), Berlin, Deutschland. |
| المصدر: | Zeitschrift fur Evidenz, Fortbildung und Qualitat im Gesundheitswesen [Z Evid Fortbild Qual Gesundhwes] 2024 May; Vol. 186, pp. 18-26. Date of Electronic Publication: 2024 Apr 04. |
| نوع المنشور: | Journal Article |
| اللغة: | German |
| بيانات الدورية: | Publisher: Elsevier Urban & Fischer Country of Publication: Netherlands NLM ID: 101477604 Publication Model: Print-Electronic Cited Medium: Internet ISSN: 2212-0289 (Electronic) Linking ISSN: 18659217 NLM ISO Abbreviation: Z Evid Fortbild Qual Gesundhwes Subsets: MEDLINE |
| أسماء مطبوعة: | Original Publication: Amsterdam ; New York : Elsevier Urban & Fischer |
| مواضيع طبية MeSH: | Quality Assurance, Health Care*/standards , Quality Indicators, Health Care*/standards , National Health Programs*/standards , Peer Review, Health Care*/standards, Germany ; Humans ; Reproducibility of Results ; Benchmarking/standards ; Peer Review/standards |
| مستخلص: | Background: Quality measurement in the German statutory program for quality in health care follows a two-step process. For selected areas of health care, quality is measured via performance indicators (first step). Providers failing to achieve benchmarks in these indicators subsequently enter into a peer review process (second step) and are asked by the respective regional authority to provide a written statement regarding their indicator results. The statements are then evaluated by peers, with the goal to assess the provider's quality of care. In the past, similar peer review-based approaches to the measurement of health care quality in other countries have shown a tendency to lack reliability. So far, the reliability of this component of the German statutory program for quality in health care has not been investigated. Method: Using logistic regression models, the influence of the respective regional authority on the peer review component of health care quality measurement in Germany was investigated using three exemplary indicators and data from 2016. Results: Both the probability that providers are asked to provide a statement as well as the results produced by the peer review process significantly depend on the regional authority in charge. This dependence cannot be fully explained by differences in the indicator results or by differences in case volume. Conclusions: The present results are in accordance with earlier findings, which show low reliability for peer review-based approaches to quality measurement. Thus, different results produced by the peer review component of the quality measurement process may in part be due to differences in the way the review process is conducted. This heterogeneity among the regional authorities limits the reliability of this process. In order to increase reliability, the peer review process should be standardized to a higher degree, with clear review criteria, and the peers should undergo comprehensive training for the review process. Alternatively, the future peer review component could be adapted to focus rather on identification of improvement strategies than on reliable provider comparisons. (Copyright © 2024. Published by Elsevier GmbH.) |
| فهرسة مساهمة: | Keywords: Peer review; Peer-Review; Performance indicators; Qualitätsindikatoren; Reliability; Reliabilität; Strukturierter Dialog; Validity; Validität |
| تواريخ الأحداث: | Date Created: 20240405 Date Completed: 20240531 Latest Revision: 20240531 |
| رمز التحديث: | 20240601 |
| DOI: | 10.1016/j.zefq.2024.02.002 |
| PMID: | 38580502 |
| قاعدة البيانات: | MEDLINE |
Full Text Finder | تدمد: | 2212-0289 |
|---|---|
| DOI: | 10.1016/j.zefq.2024.02.002 |