Premium
Performance measures for a dialysis setting
Author(s) -
Gu Xiuzhu,
Itoh Kenji
Publication year - 2018
Publication title -
journal of renal care
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.381
H-Index - 27
eISSN - 1755-6686
pISSN - 1755-6678
DOI - 10.1111/jorc.12229
Subject(s) - medicine , dialysis , nursing , health care , quality (philosophy) , quality management , patient satisfaction , job satisfaction , performance management , reliability (semiconductor) , performance indicator , operations management , medical emergency , psychology , marketing , management system , business , social psychology , philosophy , power (physics) , physics , epistemology , quantum mechanics , economics , economic growth
SUMMARY Objectives This study from Japan extracted performance measures for dialysis unit management and investigated their characteristics from professional views. Methods Two surveys were conducted using self‐administered questionnaires, in which dialysis managers/staff were asked to rate the usefulness of 44 performance indicators. A total of 255 managers and 2,097 staff responded. Results Eight performance measures were elicited from dialysis manager and staff responses: these were safety, operational efficiency, quality of working life, financial effectiveness, employee development, mortality, patient/employee satisfaction and patient‐centred health care. These performance measures were almost compatible with those extracted in overall healthcare settings in a previous study. Internal reliability, content and construct validity of the performance measures for the dialysis setting were ensured to some extent. As a general trend, both dialysis managers and staff perceived performance measures as highly useful, especially for safety, mortality, operational efficiency and patient/employee satisfaction, but showed relatively low concerns for patient‐centred health care and employee development. However, dialysis managers’ usefulness perceptions were significantly higher than staff. Conclusions Important guidelines for designing a holistic hospital/clinic management system were yielded. Performance measures must be balanced for outcomes and performance shaping factors (PSF); a common set of performance measures could be applied to all the healthcare settings, although performance indicators of each measure should be composed based on the application field and setting; in addition, sound causal relationships between PSF and outcome measures/indicators should be explored for further improvement.