Study on evaluation indicator system of disease prevention and control workload for Beijing′s public hospitals
10.3760/cma.j.issn.1000-6672.2019.09.007
- VernacularTitle: 北京市公立医院疾病预防控制工作量评价指标体系研究
- Author:
Ayan MAO
1
;
Kun WANG
;
Yueli MENG
;
Yujie YANG
;
Pei DONG
;
Guangyu HU
;
Xiaoling YAN
;
Wuqi QIU
Author Information
1. Institute of Medical Information, Chinese Academy of Medical Science/Peking Union Medical College, Beijing 100020, China
- Publication Type:Journal Article
- Keywords:
Hospitals, public;
Disease prevention and control;
Evaluation;
Indicator system
- From:
Chinese Journal of Hospital Administration
2019;35(9):738-742
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
Objective:To explore the establishment of an evaluation indicator system for disease prevention and control workload at public hospitals, based on the current situation of disease prevention and control work undertaken by public hospitals of and above secondary level in Beijing, and to provide evaluation assistance for them to do better in this regard.
Methods:This research was based on our pervious study of the current situation description of disease prevention and control work undertaken by public hospitals in Beijing, by which the contents of routine disease prevention and control work at hospitals have been initially established. The unit strength of each work was consulted, and the disease prevention and control work was classified according to the results. Meanwhile the consistency test of the work intensity within the category was carried out. After integration, the classification and evaluation indicator of disease prevention and control work in public hospitals of and above secondary level in Beijing was finally established.
Results:The workload evaluation indicator system was divided into eight parts: report work, report quality control work, monitoring work, training work, work of public health related clinical diagnosis and treatment, work of clinical examination and vaccination, work of sampling and testing and public health related consultation work. The work intensity of each category ranged from 4.78 to 7.34.
Conclusions:The evaluation indicator system of workload is suitable for the evaluation of basic works. The unified transformation of workload by using the value of work intensity is conducive to management evaluation, but the limitation of the indicators exists in time and region, making it necessary to adjust by the local specific situation at the promotion and application level.
