![]()
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Trends in hospital bed utilisation in New
Zealand
Professor Malcolm1 has
drawn attention again to the important concept that performance of providers in
the New Zealand Health Service is not necessarily equal. If those who perform
poorly can learn from those who perform well, overall performance will
improve.
Figure 5 of Malcolm’s paper shows, based on Ministry
of Health data, a 43% variation in standardised discharge ratios among the NZ
District Health Boards. Although deficiencies in the standardisation process for
age, gender and casemix on the one hand (and differing socioeconomic factors on
the other) may have contributed to the apparent variation, the probability
remains that some Health Boards use their resources more efficiently than
others.
Measurement of performance needs to be applied more
selectively throughout the Health Service. How effectively is breast cancer
diagnosed and treated in different parts of New Zealand? How effectively are
antibiotics used in different general practices? Performance in delivery of
treatment is most easily measured for common diseases which have a relatively
stereotyped clinical course.
For instance, in acute myocardial infarction, Ellis et
al2 have shown that provincial hospitals
perform less effectively than metropolitan hospitals in carrying out cardiac
investigations. And I have suggested that a similar audit should be carried out
of the pre-hospital phase of acute
infarction.3
In most cases, data are already recorded routinely so that
comparisons could be made and acted upon, and advances in information technology
will make this progressively easier to do. In the past, comparison of
doctors’ performances would have been unthinkable, but the world has
changed. In the UK, performance of individual cardiac surgeons has been
compared,4 performance of individual hospitals
in delivery of thrombolytic treatment is routinely
assessed5—and the best performing
hospitals (according to a number of criteria) have been freed from direct
government control, in order to allow greater freedom and
flexibility.6
There are many opportunities in our unified health system
with integration of primary, secondary, and tertiary care for performance to be
measured, with the prospect of general improvements in efficiency and
effectiveness of care for our patients.
Robin M Norris
Retired Cardiologist Auckland References:
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Current
issue | Search journal |
Archived issues | Classifieds
| Hotline (free ads) Subscribe | Contribute | Advertise | Contact Us | Copyright | Other Journals |