Practice Characteristics and Relative Value of Laboratory Physician's Work.
- Author:
Young Joo CHA
1
;
Dae Won KIM
;
Jong Won KIM
;
Won Ki MIN
;
Quehn PARK
;
Min Jeong PARK
;
Junghan SONG
;
Wee Gyo LEE
;
Hwan Sub LIM
;
Yoo Sung HWANG
Author Information
1. Committee for the Relative Value of Laboratory Physician Work, the Korean Society for Laboratory Medicine, Seoul, Korea. chayoung@cau.ac.kr
- Publication Type:Original Article
- Keywords:
Physician work;
Laboratory physician work;
Pre-service;
Intra-service;
Post-service;
Comprehensive pre-service;
Rasch paired comparison
- MeSH:
Diagnostic Tests, Routine;
Matched-Pair Analysis;
Quality Control;
Quality Improvement;
Relative Value Scales;
Specialization
- From:The Korean Journal of Laboratory Medicine
2005;25(6):477-488
- CountryRepublic of Korea
- Language:Korean
-
Abstract:
BACKGROUND: The Korean Medical Association intends to determine the relative value of physician's work separately from the total relative value scale for each medical or surgical procedure. This study was designed by the Korean Society for Laboratory Medicine to determine the relative value of laboratory physician's work (LPW) in each diagnostic test. The LPW was clearly defined first and then its relative value was measured quantitatively on the basis of time and intensity of work. METHODS: LPW in the laboratory test was categorized into three parts, pre-service, intra-service, and post-service. The relative value of physician's work was measured using Rasch paired comparisons. RESULTS: Practice characteristics of LPW were clearly defined according to the pre-service, intraservice, and post-service. However, any laboratory physician's effort to improve the quality of laboratory work, which could not be measured in each test, had to be comprised in a pre-service designated separately as `comprehensive pre-service'. Rasch analysis based on the rating survey for LPW taken by a diverse group of laboratory medicine and other medical specialists revealed higher values than those assigned previously in many routine diagnostic tests (e.g., Gram stain, hemoglobin, anti-HBs, ABO cell type). The results obtained by applying Rasch regression analysis showed that the diagnostic tests that had been given a low relative value of LPW tended to be measured with more improved relative valuation. CONCLUSIONS: LPW for quality control and quality improvement was acknowledged with an improved relative valuation, even in the routine diagnostic test, as the results of Rasch analysis based on the rating survey. LPW might be further equated across the specialties, considering the practice characteristics of LPW.
