ijerph-logo

Journal Browser

Journal Browser

Quality Care through Structured Health Service Improvement

A special issue of International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health (ISSN 1660-4601). This special issue belongs to the section "Global Health".

Deadline for manuscript submissions: closed (31 October 2019) | Viewed by 14577

Special Issue Editor


E-Mail Website
Guest Editor
School of Medicine, College of Health and Medicine, University of Tasmania, Brickport Road, 7320 Burnie, Australia
Interests: healthcare quality and safety; patient-centered care; co-design, clinical redesign; health service improvement; rural health service delivery

Special Issue Information

Dear Colleagues,

Quality in healthcare is an ongoing challenge for many health organisations across a broad range of specialties. Health service improvement through clinical redesign or co-design provides an opportunity to undertake a structured investigation to review and identify strengths and weaknesses of service provision through a patient-focussed lens.

Healthcare is a complex and constantly changing environment which requires a multidisciplinary skill set for the delivery of efficient, effective and high-quality services. Globally, systematic health service improvements are undertaken to support evidence-based decision making and promote steps for successful implementation and sustainability of healthcare quality initiatives and workplace-integrated research projects.

This Special Issue aims to present original research, articles, reviews and short communications in the area of healthcare quality improvement and service redesign with a focus on the following:

  • Health service improvement in the public health domain
  • The development, implementation and evaluation of quality improvement initiatives in healthcare
  • Patient-centered clinical redesign and its effects on patient care
  • Co-design for forward planning of quality improvement in healthcare

Dr. Sarah Prior
Guest Editor

Manuscript Submission Information

Manuscripts should be submitted online at www.mdpi.com by registering and logging in to this website. Once you are registered, click here to go to the submission form. Manuscripts can be submitted until the deadline. All submissions that pass pre-check are peer-reviewed. Accepted papers will be published continuously in the journal (as soon as accepted) and will be listed together on the special issue website. Research articles, review articles as well as short communications are invited. For planned papers, a title and short abstract (about 100 words) can be sent to the Editorial Office for announcement on this website.

Submitted manuscripts should not have been published previously, nor be under consideration for publication elsewhere (except conference proceedings papers). All manuscripts are thoroughly refereed through a single-blind peer-review process. A guide for authors and other relevant information for submission of manuscripts is available on the Instructions for Authors page. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health is an international peer-reviewed open access monthly journal published by MDPI.

Please visit the Instructions for Authors page before submitting a manuscript. The Article Processing Charge (APC) for publication in this open access journal is 2500 CHF (Swiss Francs). Submitted papers should be well formatted and use good English. Authors may use MDPI's English editing service prior to publication or during author revisions.

Keywords

  • Health service improvement in the public health domain
  • The development, implementation and evaluation of quality improvement initiatives in healthcare
  • Patient-centered clinical redesign and its effects on patient care
  • Co-design for forward planning of quality improvement in healthcare

Published Papers (3 papers)

Order results
Result details
Select all
Export citation of selected articles as:

Research

Jump to: Review

17 pages, 1552 KiB  
Article
Agile Six Sigma in Healthcare: Case Study at Santobono Pediatric Hospital
by Giovanni Improta, Guido Guizzi, Carlo Ricciardi, Vincenzo Giordano, Alfonso Maria Ponsiglione, Giuseppe Converso and Maria Triassi
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020, 17(3), 1052; https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17031052 - 07 Feb 2020
Cited by 61 | Viewed by 7881
Abstract
Healthcare is one of the most complex systems to manage. In recent years, the control of processes and the modelling of public administrations have been considered some of the main areas of interest in management. In particular, one of the most problematic issues [...] Read more.
Healthcare is one of the most complex systems to manage. In recent years, the control of processes and the modelling of public administrations have been considered some of the main areas of interest in management. In particular, one of the most problematic issues is the management of waiting lists and the consequent absenteeism of patients. Patient no-shows imply a loss of time and resources, and in this paper, the strategy of overbooking is analysed as a solution. Here, a real waiting list process is simulated with discrete event simulation (DES) software, and the activities performed by hospital staff are reproduced. The methodology employed combines agile manufacturing and Six Sigma, focusing on a paediatric public hospital pavilion. Different scenarios show that the overbooking strategy is effective in ensuring fairness of access to services. Indeed, all patients respect the times dictated by the waiting list, without “favouritism”, which is guaranteed by the logic of replacement. In a comparison between a real sample of bookings and a simulated sample designed to improve no-shows, no statistically significant difference is found. This model will allow health managers to provide patients with faster service and to better manage their resources. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Quality Care through Structured Health Service Improvement)
Show Figures

Figure 1

Review

Jump to: Research

14 pages, 786 KiB  
Review
Mapping the Status of Healthcare Improvement Science through a Narrative Review in Six European Countries
by Manuel Lillo-Crespo, Maria Cristina Sierras-Davó, Alan Taylor, Katrina Ritters and Aimilia Karapostoli
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2019, 16(22), 4480; https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph16224480 - 14 Nov 2019
Cited by 3 | Viewed by 2781
Abstract
With the aim to explore how improvement science is understood, taught, practiced, and its impact on quality healthcare across Europe, the Improvement Science Training for European Healthcare Workers (ISTEW) project “Improvement Science Training for European Healthcare Workers” was funded by the European Commission [...] Read more.
With the aim to explore how improvement science is understood, taught, practiced, and its impact on quality healthcare across Europe, the Improvement Science Training for European Healthcare Workers (ISTEW) project “Improvement Science Training for European Healthcare Workers” was funded by the European Commission and integrated by 7 teams from different European countries. As part of the project, a narrative literature review was conducted between 2008 and 2019, including documents in all partners’ languages from 26 databases. Data collection and analysis involved a common database. Validation took place through partners’ discussions. Referring to healthcare improvement science (HIS), a variety of terms, tools, and techniques were reported with no baseline definition or specific framework. All partner teams were informed about the non-existence of a specific term equivalent to HIS in their mother languages, except for the English-speaking countries. A lack of consensus, regarding the understanding and implementation of HIS into the healthcare and educational contexts was found. Our findings have brought to light the gap existing in HIS within Europe, far from other nations, such as the US, where there is a clearer HIS picture. As a consequence, the authors suggest further developing the standardization of HIS understanding and education in Europe. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Quality Care through Structured Health Service Improvement)
Show Figures

Figure 1

16 pages, 478 KiB  
Review
Patient Education and Continuing Medical Education to Promote Shared Decision-Making. A Systematic Literature Review
by Anke Wagner, Natalia Radionova, Monika A. Rieger and Achim Siegel
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2019, 16(14), 2482; https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph16142482 - 12 Jul 2019
Cited by 14 | Viewed by 3540
Abstract
Background: Over recent years, the use of decision aids to promote shared decision-making have been examined. Studies on patient education and on continuing medical education for physicians are less common. This review analyzes intervention and evaluation studies on patient education and continuing [...] Read more.
Background: Over recent years, the use of decision aids to promote shared decision-making have been examined. Studies on patient education and on continuing medical education for physicians are less common. This review analyzes intervention and evaluation studies on patient education and continuing medical education which aim to enhance shared decision-making. The following study parameters are of interest: Study designs, objectives, numbers of participants in the education courses, interventions, primary results, and quality of the studies. Methods: We systematically searched for suitable studies in two databases (Pubmed and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews) from the beginning of April through to mid-June 2016. Results: 16 studies from a total of 462 hits were included: Three studies on patient education and 13 studies on continuing medical education for physicians. Overall, the study parameters were heterogeneous. Major differences were found between the courses; how the courses were conducted, their length, and participants. Conclusions: The differences found in the studies made it difficult to compare the interventions and the results. There is a need for studies that systematically evaluate and further develop interventions in this area to promote shared decision-making. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Quality Care through Structured Health Service Improvement)
Show Figures

Figure 1

Back to TopTop