Research ExplorerPublicationsSystematische Ergebnisanalyse als Qualitätsinstrument am Bei...

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, Vol. 54, No. 11, 11.2015, p. 1537-45.

Research output: SCORING: Contribution to journal › SCORING: Journal article › Research › peer-review

Harvard

Beyer, B, Huland, H & Graefen, M 2015, 'Systematische Ergebnisanalyse als Qualitätsinstrument am Beispiel des größten europäischen Zentrums', UROLOGE, vol. 54, no. 11, pp. 1537-45. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00120-015-3836-x

APA

Beyer, B., Huland, H., & Graefen, M. (2015). Systematische Ergebnisanalyse als Qualitätsinstrument am Beispiel des größten europäischen Zentrums. UROLOGE, 54(11), 1537-45. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00120-015-3836-x

Vancouver

Beyer B, Huland H, Graefen M. Systematische Ergebnisanalyse als Qualitätsinstrument am Beispiel des größten europäischen Zentrums. UROLOGE. 2015 Nov;54(11):1537-45. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00120-015-3836-x

Bibtex

@article{1276d47f77a446698f92d783ab988c30,
title = "Systematische Ergebnisanalyse als Qualit{\"a}tsinstrument am Beispiel des gr{\"o}{\ss}ten europ{\"a}ischen Zentrums",
abstract = "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.",
author = "B Beyer and H Huland and M Graefen",
year = "2015",
month = nov,
doi = "10.1007/s00120-015-3836-x",
language = "Deutsch",
volume = "54",
pages = "1537--45",
journal = "UROLOGE",
issn = "0340-2592",
publisher = "Springer",
number = "11",

}

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 -