A. Aloy-Duch , M. Santiñà Vila , F. Ramos-D’Angelo , L. Alonso Calo , M.E. Llaneza-Velasco , B. Fortuny-Organs , A. Apezetxea-Celaya
{"title":"卫生中心质量单位标准的制定和验证","authors":"A. Aloy-Duch , M. Santiñà Vila , F. Ramos-D’Angelo , L. Alonso Calo , M.E. Llaneza-Velasco , B. Fortuny-Organs , A. Apezetxea-Celaya","doi":"10.1016/j.jhqr.2023.09.009","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objective</h3><p>In Spain, the Quality Units advise health centres, services and professionals on the methodology of continuous improvement of the quality of care. A system based on good practice standards could provide these units with a tool to improve their results and value their work. The objective was to develop, agree on and validate standards, to properly guide and orient the functions, results and continuous improvement of the Quality Units in health centers.</p></div><div><h3>Material and methods</h3><p>A qualitative–quantitative, prospective and cross-sectional study was carried out, applying the Metaplan method, the e-Delphi technique and a simulation study. The participants were coordinators of these units, belonging to 14 Spanish Autonomous Communities and distributed in four experts’ panels. They agreed on the standards to be used and evaluated the different types of validity.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>The 204 standards proposed by the scientific committee were reduced to 157 with Metaplan, to 110 with e-Delphi, and to 96 with the committee's final review (87.3% consensus, content validity). The construct validity showed a Cronbach's alpha ><!--> <!-->0.7 (<em>P</em> <!--><<!--> <!-->.001); the validity of content was reaffirmed in the simulation workshop (80% “understood” each other, <em>P</em> <!--><<!--> <!-->.001; and there was “documentary evidence” in 84%, <em>P</em> <!--><<!--> <!-->.001); face validity was accepted (75% “related to quality dimensions”, <em>P</em> <!--><<!--> <!-->.001); and the validity of the criteria was verified with a sensitivity of 84.2%, a specificity of 98.3%, and a kappa index of 0.84.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>Valid standards have been developed for Quality Units in health centers.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":37347,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Healthcare Quality Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Desarrollo y validación de estándares para unidades de calidad de centros sanitarios\",\"authors\":\"A. Aloy-Duch , M. Santiñà Vila , F. Ramos-D’Angelo , L. Alonso Calo , M.E. Llaneza-Velasco , B. Fortuny-Organs , A. Apezetxea-Celaya\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.jhqr.2023.09.009\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Objective</h3><p>In Spain, the Quality Units advise health centres, services and professionals on the methodology of continuous improvement of the quality of care. A system based on good practice standards could provide these units with a tool to improve their results and value their work. The objective was to develop, agree on and validate standards, to properly guide and orient the functions, results and continuous improvement of the Quality Units in health centers.</p></div><div><h3>Material and methods</h3><p>A qualitative–quantitative, prospective and cross-sectional study was carried out, applying the Metaplan method, the e-Delphi technique and a simulation study. The participants were coordinators of these units, belonging to 14 Spanish Autonomous Communities and distributed in four experts’ panels. They agreed on the standards to be used and evaluated the different types of validity.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>The 204 standards proposed by the scientific committee were reduced to 157 with Metaplan, to 110 with e-Delphi, and to 96 with the committee's final review (87.3% consensus, content validity). The construct validity showed a Cronbach's alpha ><!--> <!-->0.7 (<em>P</em> <!--><<!--> <!-->.001); the validity of content was reaffirmed in the simulation workshop (80% “understood” each other, <em>P</em> <!--><<!--> <!-->.001; and there was “documentary evidence” in 84%, <em>P</em> <!--><<!--> <!-->.001); face validity was accepted (75% “related to quality dimensions”, <em>P</em> <!--><<!--> <!-->.001); and the validity of the criteria was verified with a sensitivity of 84.2%, a specificity of 98.3%, and a kappa index of 0.84.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>Valid standards have been developed for Quality Units in health centers.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":37347,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Healthcare Quality Research\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-11-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Healthcare Quality Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S260364792300057X\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Healthcare Quality Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S260364792300057X","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
Desarrollo y validación de estándares para unidades de calidad de centros sanitarios
Objective
In Spain, the Quality Units advise health centres, services and professionals on the methodology of continuous improvement of the quality of care. A system based on good practice standards could provide these units with a tool to improve their results and value their work. The objective was to develop, agree on and validate standards, to properly guide and orient the functions, results and continuous improvement of the Quality Units in health centers.
Material and methods
A qualitative–quantitative, prospective and cross-sectional study was carried out, applying the Metaplan method, the e-Delphi technique and a simulation study. The participants were coordinators of these units, belonging to 14 Spanish Autonomous Communities and distributed in four experts’ panels. They agreed on the standards to be used and evaluated the different types of validity.
Results
The 204 standards proposed by the scientific committee were reduced to 157 with Metaplan, to 110 with e-Delphi, and to 96 with the committee's final review (87.3% consensus, content validity). The construct validity showed a Cronbach's alpha > 0.7 (P < .001); the validity of content was reaffirmed in the simulation workshop (80% “understood” each other, P < .001; and there was “documentary evidence” in 84%, P < .001); face validity was accepted (75% “related to quality dimensions”, P < .001); and the validity of the criteria was verified with a sensitivity of 84.2%, a specificity of 98.3%, and a kappa index of 0.84.
Conclusions
Valid standards have been developed for Quality Units in health centers.
期刊介绍：
Revista de Calidad Asistencial (Quality Healthcare) (RCA) is the official Journal of the Spanish Society of Quality Healthcare (Sociedad Española de Calidad Asistencial) (SECA) and is a tool for the dissemination of knowledge and reflection for the quality management of health services in Primary Care, as well as in Hospitals. It publishes articles associated with any aspect of research in the field of public health and health administration, including health education, epidemiology, medical statistics, health information, health economics, quality management, and health policies. The Journal publishes 6 issues, exclusively in electronic format. The Journal publishes, in Spanish, Original works, Special and Review Articles, as well as other sections. Articles are subjected to a rigorous, double blind, review process (peer review)
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
