4.6 Review

Core indicators of an evaluation and guidance system for quality of care in inflammatory bowel disease centers: A critical review

Journal

ECLINICALMEDICINE
Volume 46, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.eclinm.2022.101382

Keywords

Quality of care; Inflammatory bowel disease; Inflammatory bowel disease quality care evaluation center; Core indicators

Funding

  1. Cultivation Funding for Clinical Scientific Research Innovation, Renji Hospital, School of Medicine, Shanghai Jiaotong University [RJPY-LX-004]
  2. National Natural Science Foundation of China [81,770,545]
  3. Shanghai Science and Technology Innovation Initiative [21SQBS02302]
  4. Cultivated Funding for Clinical Research Innovation, Renji Hospital, School of Medicine, Shanghai Jiaotong University [RJPY-LX-004]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The mission of the IBD Quality Care Evaluation Center is to establish a network of IBD quality care units in China and improve the national level of IBD healthcare. Using a Delphi consensus methodology, a list of core and secondary IBD quality care indicators suitable for the Chinese healthcare system was selected, and units meeting the indicators were certified.
The mission of the IBD Quality Care Evaluation Center (IBDQCC) is to establish indicators of quality of care (QoC), certify IBD units to generate a network of IBD quality care, and eventually improve the national level of IBD healthcare. The final list of 28 core and 13 secondary IBD QoC indicators suitable for the healthcare system in China were selected using a Delphi consensus methodology. Units that met all core indicators were qualified as regional; units that met all core indicators together with more than 50% of the secondary indicators received a rating of excellence. Using the selected QoC core indicators for certifying IBD units, a network of IBD quality care units covering the majority of IBD patients in China was established. Copyright (C) 2022 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available