International journal for quality in health care : journal of the International Society for Quality in Health Care
-
Int J Qual Health Care · Feb 2003
Review Comparative StudyDevelopment of appropriateness criteria for colonoscopy: comparison between a standardized expert panel and an evidence-based medicine approach.
To assess the degree of agreement between appropriateness criteria for the use of colonoscopy developed by a standardized expert panel method and evidence from published studies. ⋯ Evidence for the appropriateness of most indications for colonoscopy could not be derived directly from the published literature. Agreement between appropriateness criteria developed by an expert panel and evidence from published studies was moderate to good, where available. New approaches should be sought in order to systematically integrate complementary evidence obtained from clinical trials and expert panels into practice guidelines.
-
Int J Qual Health Care · Feb 2003
Comparative StudyQuality of psychiatric care: validation of an instrument for measuring inpatient opinion.
To validate a brief self-completed questionnaire for routinely assessing patients' opinions on the quality of care in inpatient psychiatric wards (Rome Opinion Questionnaire for Psychiatric Wards). ⋯ The questionnaire seems to be adequate for evaluating patients' opinions on care in inpatient psychiatric wards. Because of its user-friendliness, it may be particularly suitable for routine use.
-
Int J Qual Health Care · Dec 2002
Reliability and validity of the Satisfaction with Hospital Care Questionnaire.
To establish the psychometric properties of the Satisfaction with Hospital Care Questionnaire (SHCQ) for measuring patient satisfaction and evaluations of hospital care quality. ⋯ The SHCQ reliably establishes both patient satisfaction and overall quality of hospital care. Whereas patients' ratings may be too lenient, their ranking of the items on care quality appears to be valid, and is therefore suitable for monitoring and improving hospital care. Within scales, however, results should be interpreted more cautiously: for some items, patients cannot really tell the difference in quality of care.