A quality assessment index framework for public health services: a Delphi study

Abstract Objectives This study sought consensus-based indices for quality assessment of the public health service (QAPHS) to evaluate the service quality of public health in Shenzhen and other cities in China. Study design A qualitative study. Methods A list of quality assessment indices was formed...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Public health (London) 2015-01, Vol.129 (1), p.43-51
Main Authors: Zhao, Z.G, Cheng, J.Q, Xu, S.L, Hou, W.L, Richardus, J.H
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Authority
China
China (People's Republic)
Consensus
Delphi
Delphi Technique
Health policy
Humans
Index
Indexes
Infectious Disease
Internal Medicine
Public health
Public Health Administration - methods
Public health service
Quality assessment
Reproducibility of Results
Specialists
Specialization
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Abstract Objectives This study sought consensus-based indices for quality assessment of the public health service (QAPHS) to evaluate the service quality of public health in Shenzhen and other cities in China. Study design A qualitative study. Methods A list of quality assessment indices was formed based on Donabedian theory. These indices were presented to an expert panel in a two-round Delphi study to establish a consensus view. A weight of indices was established to validate the applicability and practicability of the framework. The specialist authority coefficient and Kendall's W were also calculated based on statistical analysis. Results A total of 30 experts participated in the Delphi study. Consensus was reached on four first-grade indices, nine second-grade indices and 28 third-grade indices. The specialist authority coefficient (Cr) was high (between 0.88 and 0.92), while Kendall's coefficient ( W ) of all the indices was ＞0.5 with statistical significant differences ( P  ＜ 0.05). This indicated correlation among panelists and had high reliability. Conclusions A unified and hierarchical quality assessment index framework for public health services was established. The framework should be further tested and improved in practice.
ISSN:0033-3506
1476-5616
DOI:10.1016/j.puhe.2014.10.016