• Die Rehabilitation · Oct 2008

    [Evaluation of an indicator-based screening procedure for identifying quality problems in medical rehabilitation of the German statutory accident insurance].

    • M Lukasczik, C Gerlich, S Neuderth, H Weber-Falkensammer, and H Vogel.
    • Universität Würzburg, Institut für Psychotherapie und Medizinische Psychologie, Arbeitsbereich Rehabilitationswissenschaften, Würzburg. matthias.lukasczik@uni-wuerzburg.de
    • Rehabilitation (Stuttg). 2008 Oct 1; 47 (5): 275-83.

    AbstractIn the context of medical rehabilitation quality assurance, the use of screening procedures aims at specifically screening for rehabilitative cases that might be affected by quality problems. These may then be subjected to more elaborate quality management procedures. In the study presented, a criteria-based screening checklist designed to tap potential quality problems among rehabilitative cases in the German statutory accident insurance medical rehabilitation system was evaluated regarding its validity and suitability for routine use. Checklists were filled out by accident insurance administrators in three regional insurance funds who were instructed to evaluate all current rehabilitation cases (n=189) with regard to potential quality problems. For validation of the instrument, case reviews by physicians familiar with medical and administrative features of the accident insurance rehabilitation system were used. About a fifth of all cases reviewed using the screening checklist (22%) were classified as potentially problematic in terms of quality. Absence of relevant documents, delays in document receipt, and complications during treatment were cited as the most frequent problems. Concordance between the screening checklist and physicians' ratings concerning the quality of rehabilitative cases was moderate. Sensitivity and specificity were insufficient when using physicians' ratings as a validation criterion (0.53 and 0.56, respectively). Accident insurance administrators rated the screening checklist as a useful and practical quality management instrument. Concerning its insufficient validity using physicians' ratings as a validation criterion, the suitability of the checklist as a screening instrument is questionable. The instrument's potential of introducing the accident insurance administrators' expertise and knowledge into medical rehabilitation quality management strategies is highlighted. Further research on methodological aspects of the instrument as well as its content features is warranted. Starting points for modifications are outlined.

      Pubmed     Full text   Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…

What will the 'Medical Journal of You' look like?

Start your free 21 day trial now.

We guarantee your privacy. Your email address will not be shared.