Quality of care analyses using ICD 11: Detailed capture of treatment events
Bundesgesundheitsblatt - Gesundheitsforschung - Gesundheitsschutz, ISSN: 1437-1588, Vol: 61, Issue: 7, Page: 821-827
2018
- 1Citations
- 15Captures
Metric Options: CountsSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Article Description
The identification of treatment errors, the so-called “undesirable” or “critical incidents”, is crucial for improving and developing the quality of care. The new International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems—ICD-11—supports a structured data collection in the context of the quality of care and patient safety. Documentation conceptually relies on the multiple coding of the three dimensions of a critical incident: harm, cause, and mode. In this way, it is possible to capture the event in great detail, including the reasons for it and the effects it has. An evaluation of this concept in a field trial using 45 clinical case studies showed good concordance in coding across the documented participants. As the ICD-11 permits the detailed capture of near misses and their context, it could be used for structured documentation in incident reporting systems (databanks for the anonymous reporting of treatment errors). In this way, the error reports can be gathered in a more systematic way, so that they can be used for better quality improvement. In quality assessment, it is important to consider the time of diagnosis. Thus, the feature present on admission (POA) is a diagnosis qualifier that is of substantial importance for quality assessment and is widely used internationally. Up to now, it has not been permanently available in Germany. ICD-11 includes the relevant code.
Bibliographic Details
http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=85047665046&origin=inward; http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00103-018-2749-4; http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29808284; http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s00103-018-2749-4; https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00103-018-2749-4; https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00103-018-2749-4
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know