Measurement of healthcare quality in atopic dermatitis – development and application of a set of quality indicators. (13th June 2018)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Steinke, S.; Beikert, F.C.; Langenbruch, A.; Fölster‐Holst, R.; Ring, J.; Schmitt, J.; Werfel, T.; Hintzen, S.; Franzke, N.; Augustin, M.
• Is Part Of: Journal of the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology. Volume 32:Number 12(2018)
• Page Start: 2237
• Page End: 2243
• Publication Date: 2018-06-13
• Subjects: Dermatology -- Periodicals; Sexually transmitted diseases -- Periodicals; 616.5
• DOI: 10.1111/jdv.15074
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0926-9959

Abstract

Abstract: Background: Quality indicators are essential tools for the assessment of health care, in particular for guideline‐based procedures. Objective: Development of a set of indicators for the evaluation of process and outcomes quality in atopic dermatitis (AD) care. Application of the indicators to a cross‐sectional study and creation of a global process quality index. Methods: An expert committee consisting of 10 members of the German guideline group on AD condensed potential quality indicators to a final set of 5 outcomes quality and 12 process quality indicators using a Delphi panel. The outcomes quality and 7 resp. 8 process quality indicators were retrospectively applied to a nationwide study on 1678 patients with atopic dermatitis (AtopicHealth). Each individual process quality indicator score was then summed up to a global index (ranges from 0 [no quality achieved] to 100 [full quality achieved]) displaying the quality of health care. Results: In total, the global process quality index revealed a median value of 62.5 and did not or only slightly correlate to outcomes quality indicators like the median SCORing Atopic Dermatitis (SCORAD; rp = 0.08), Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI; rp = 0.256) and Patient Benefit Index (PBI; rp = −0.151). Conclusion: Process quality of AD care is moderate to good. The healthcare process quality index does not substantially correlate to the health status of AD patients measured by 5 different outcomes quality indicators. Further research should include the investigation of reliability, responsiveness and feasibility of the proposed quality indicators for AD.