Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Towards actionable international comparisons of health system performance: expert revision of the OECD framework and quality indicators.
Carinci, F; Van Gool, K; Mainz, J; Veillard, J; Pichora, E C; Januel, J M; Arispe, I; Kim, S M; Klazinga, N S.
Afiliación
  • Carinci F; National Agency for Regional Health Services (AGENAS), Rome, Italy University of Surrey, Guildford, United Kingdom.
  • Van Gool K; Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), Paris, France Centre for Health Economics Research and Evaluation, University of Technology, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
  • Mainz J; University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark.
  • Veillard J; Canadian Institute for Health Information (CIHI), Toronto, Canada.
  • Pichora EC; Canadian Institute for Health Information (CIHI), Toronto, Canada.
  • Januel JM; University of Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland.
  • Arispe I; National Center for Health Statistics, Washington, DC, USA.
  • Kim SM; Health Insurance Review and Assessment Service, Seoul, Korea.
  • Klazinga NS; Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), Paris, France.
Int J Qual Health Care ; 27(2): 137-46, 2015 Apr.
Article en En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-25758443
OBJECTIVE: To review and update the conceptual framework, indicator content and research priorities of the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development's (OECD) Health Care Quality Indicators (HCQI) project, after a decade of collaborative work. DESIGN: A structured assessment was carried out using a modified Delphi approach, followed by a consensus meeting, to assess the suite of HCQI for international comparisons, agree on revisions to the original framework and set priorities for research and development. SETTING: International group of countries participating to OECD projects. PARTICIPANTS: Members of the OECD HCQI expert group. RESULTS: A reference matrix, based on a revised performance framework, was used to map and assess all seventy HCQI routinely calculated by the OECD expert group. A total of 21 indicators were agreed to be excluded, due to the following concerns: (i) relevance, (ii) international comparability, particularly where heterogeneous coding practices might induce bias, (iii) feasibility, when the number of countries able to report was limited and the added value did not justify sustained effort and (iv) actionability, for indicators that were unlikely to improve on the basis of targeted policy interventions. CONCLUSIONS: The revised OECD framework for HCQI represents a new milestone of a long-standing international collaboration among a group of countries committed to building common ground for performance measurement. The expert group believes that the continuation of this work is paramount to provide decision makers with a validated toolbox to directly act on quality improvement strategies.
Asunto(s)
Palabras clave
Texto completo
Añadir a Mi BVS
Imprimir
XML
PubMed Links
Buscar en Google

Texto completo: 1 Colección: 01-internacional Base de datos: MEDLINE Asunto principal: Calidad de la Atención de Salud / Indicadores de Calidad de la Atención de Salud / Organización para la Cooperación y el Desarrollo Económico Tipo de estudio: Guideline / Prognostic_studies Límite: Humans Idioma: En Revista: Int J Qual Health Care Asunto de la revista: SERVICOS DE SAUDE Año: 2015 Tipo del documento: Article País de afiliación: Reino Unido Pais de publicación: Reino Unido
Texto completo
Añadir a Mi BVS
Imprimir
XML
PubMed Links
Buscar en Google

Texto completo: 1 Colección: 01-internacional Base de datos: MEDLINE Asunto principal: Calidad de la Atención de Salud / Indicadores de Calidad de la Atención de Salud / Organización para la Cooperación y el Desarrollo Económico Tipo de estudio: Guideline / Prognostic_studies Límite: Humans Idioma: En Revista: Int J Qual Health Care Asunto de la revista: SERVICOS DE SAUDE Año: 2015 Tipo del documento: Article País de afiliación: Reino Unido Pais de publicación: Reino Unido