Geraedts M, de Cruppé W. [Effects of statutory quality assurance in acute inpatient care].
Bundesgesundheitsblatt Gesundheitsforschung Gesundheitsschutz 2022;
65:285-292. [PMID:
35122107 PMCID:
PMC8888375 DOI:
10.1007/s00103-022-03489-z]
[Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/27/2021] [Accepted: 01/10/2022] [Indexed: 11/28/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND
Statutory quality assurance (QA) serves to ensure and further develop the quality of service provision. Particularly prominent in Germany's acute inpatient care are mandatory quality reports (QRs) and participation in external quality assessments (eQAs). Their effects have not yet been comprehensively evaluated.
OBJECTIVES
What are the effects of eQAs and QRs on the quality of care?
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Based on a selective literature review, international evidence on the effects of QA was compiled. This was supplemented by analyses of the quality reports of the Federal Office for Quality Assurance (BQS), the Institute for Applied Quality Improvement and Research in Health Care (AQUA), and the Institute for Quality Assurance and Transparency in Healthcare (IQTIG), which have been responsible for eQAs since 2001.
RESULTS
According to international literature, at most weak effects of these measures can be expected, especially on process quality. Studies from Germany mostly observe only uncontrolled temporal trends and partly show improved quality indicators. Only one controlled study each was able to show weak positive effects on outcome and process quality for eQAs and QRs, respectively.
CONCLUSIONS
There are no convincing evaluation results for either the QRs or the eQAs. Deficiencies in the addressee-oriented design of the QRs and the reported indicator results in terms of their validity, risk adjustment, and temporal availability can be cited as potential causes. Statutory QA should be revised by paying more attention to the prerequisites for successful performance feedback and by again creating room for an intrinsically motivated assessment of one's own quality of care.
Collapse