Cargando…
Quality of primary care provided in community clinics in Japan
BACKGROUND: Quality indicators (QIs) for primary care are used worldwide. To date, however, the use of QIs to assess the quality of primary care in Japan has not been reported besides diabetes care. Here, we used QIs to evaluate the quality of primary care services provided by local clinics in Japan...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
John Wiley and Sons Inc.
2018
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6399592/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30873304 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/jgf2.229 |
Sumario: | BACKGROUND: Quality indicators (QIs) for primary care are used worldwide. To date, however, the use of QIs to assess the quality of primary care in Japan has not been reported besides diabetes care. Here, we used QIs to evaluate the quality of primary care services provided by local clinics in Japan. METHODS: Four primary care clinics participated in the retrospective medical chart review in 2015. To assess primary care quality, we used 18 process‐oriented QIs from the Quality Indicators for Primary Care practice in Japan (QIPC‐J) those we previously developed by using a modified Delphi appropriateness method, which comprises 39 QIs in five categories (Comprehensive care/Standardized care, Access, Communication, Coordination, and Understanding of patient's background). Adult subjects were selected from among patients who visited each clinic within the previous one year using medical claims data. We collected data by reviewing medical charts, and calculated the quality score for each QI and clinic. RESULTS: A cumulative total of 4330 medical charts were reviewed. The overall quality score was 31.5%. Adherence to QIs ranged from 3.2% to 85.6%. Some quality scores varied substantially between clinics but the overall quality of care among clinics varied less, from 29.2% to 34.0%. CONCLUSIONS: The quality of primary care services provided by local clinics in Japan varies by both QI and clinic. Strategies to improve the quality of care are warranted. |
---|