SciELO - Scientific Electronic Library Online

 
vol.32 issue5Hypercalcaemia as a side effect of potassium binding agentsThe importance of early haemodiafiltration in the treatment of lactic acidosis associated with the administration of metformin author indexsubject indexarticles search
Home Pagealphabetic serial listing  

Services on Demand

Journal

Article

Indicators

Related links

  • On index processCited by Google
  • Have no similar articlesSimilars in SciELO
  • On index processSimilars in Google

Share


Nefrología (Madrid)

On-line version ISSN 1989-2284Print version ISSN 0211-6995

Abstract

PARRA, Eduardo  and  SOCIEDAD ESPANOLA DE NEFROLOGIA. Gestión de la Calidad et al. Outcomes weighting for comprehensive haemodialysis centre assessment. Nefrología (Madr.) [online]. 2012, vol.32, n.5, pp.659-663. ISSN 1989-2284.  http://dx.doi.org/10.3265/Nefrologia.pre2012.Jun.11426.

Background: At present, there is no adequate system available for evaluating dialysis centres. Objectives: To construct an overall haemodialysis results weighting system, acceptable to the different stakeholders involved which allows the comparison of centres using a compound marker. Method: The Quality Management Work Group of the Spanish Society of Nephrology (WG) established a set of preselected indicators. A Focus Group, independent of the WG, was established. It was made up of nine individuals: three patients, three clinicians and three clinical managers, who assessed these indicators using an approved methodology and established the selected indicators. Finally, the indicators were weighted through three weighting stages, each separated by two debate periods, which involved the distribution of 100 points between each variable, according to the personal assessment and the debate sustained. Results: The clinical results included: haemodialysis doses, anaemia, plasma calcium and phosphorus, type of vascular access, and hospitalization days. The weighting given to each variable following the third weighting process, expressed as an average of all the factors, was as follows: clinical results 38.9; annual mortality 25.0; satisfaction with the centre 12.2; health-related quality of life 15.6; and cost 8.3 (total 100). Conclusions: The weighting structure covers relevant and overall results and includes the opinion of all stakeholders involved; all of which may increase its acceptability and widespread use and contribute to the analysis of the value produced by the centres and the improvement of the results.

Keywords : End stage renal disease; Haemodialysis; Outcome assessent; Quality of health care; Quality of Life; Patient satisfaction.

        · abstract in Spanish     · text in Spanish     · Spanish ( pdf )

 

Creative Commons License All the contents of this journal, except where otherwise noted, is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License