Systematische Ergebnisanalyse als Qualitätsinstrument am Beispiel des größten europäischen Zentrums
Standard
Systematische Ergebnisanalyse als Qualitätsinstrument am Beispiel des größten europäischen Zentrums. / Beyer, B; Huland, H; Graefen, M.
in: UROLOGE, Jahrgang 54, Nr. 11, 11.2015, S. 1537-45.Publikationen: SCORING: Beitrag in Fachzeitschrift/Zeitung › SCORING: Zeitschriftenaufsatz › Forschung › Begutachtung
Harvard
APA
Vancouver
Bibtex
}
RIS
TY - JOUR
T1 - Systematische Ergebnisanalyse als Qualitätsinstrument am Beispiel des größten europäischen Zentrums
AU - Beyer, B
AU - Huland, H
AU - Graefen, M
PY - 2015/11
Y1 - 2015/11
N2 - BACKGROUND: Measurement of the quality of treatment has become increasingly important in hospitals. An easy and practical solution in data acquisition is the Patient-Reported Outcome Measurement (PROM).METHODS: In this article the historical development, general conditions, and difficulties of using the outcome measurement in our patients are describe. In addition, we illustrate the wide range of benefits due to our survey. Based on data from 2008-2013, the functional and oncological results of treatment in our clinic are shown. The main focus lies on the PROMs, e.g., urinary continence evaluated with the daily pad use, sexual function with the IIEF-5 questionnaire, and postoperative complications.CONCLUSIONS: A systematic and standardized outcome measurement may help to improve the quality of treatment, provides factual information for patients, and supports medical development.
AB - BACKGROUND: Measurement of the quality of treatment has become increasingly important in hospitals. An easy and practical solution in data acquisition is the Patient-Reported Outcome Measurement (PROM).METHODS: In this article the historical development, general conditions, and difficulties of using the outcome measurement in our patients are describe. In addition, we illustrate the wide range of benefits due to our survey. Based on data from 2008-2013, the functional and oncological results of treatment in our clinic are shown. The main focus lies on the PROMs, e.g., urinary continence evaluated with the daily pad use, sexual function with the IIEF-5 questionnaire, and postoperative complications.CONCLUSIONS: A systematic and standardized outcome measurement may help to improve the quality of treatment, provides factual information for patients, and supports medical development.
U2 - 10.1007/s00120-015-3836-x
DO - 10.1007/s00120-015-3836-x
M3 - SCORING: Zeitschriftenaufsatz
C2 - 26573671
VL - 54
SP - 1537
EP - 1545
JO - UROLOGE
JF - UROLOGE
SN - 0340-2592
IS - 11
ER -