Objective:To explore the application and effect of multi-level quality control system (referred to as “quality control”) in health management center setting.Methods:The health management center of Hanzhong Central Hospital constructed a multi-level quality control system of “hospital-department-unit” and “department-unit-quality-controller” in August 2019. A total of 83 619 people who underwent physical examination in the Health Management Center of Hanzhong Central Hospital from August 2018 to July 2020 were selected as the subjects. 32 009 people who underwent physical examination from August 2018 to July 2019 were selected as the control group, and 51 610 people who underwent physical examination from August 2019 to July 2020 were selected as the experimental group. The timely notification of important abnormal results and the follow-up of the “four-high” population (hypertension, hyperglycemia, hyperlipidemia, and hyperuricemia) were observed. Two thousand satisfaction questionnaires and two thousand physical examination reports were collected from the institutions who had received both physical examination in the Health Management Center of Hanzhong Central Hospital for two consecutive years. The physical examination items of the above clients were basically the same. The satisfaction rate of the two groups of physical examination and the qualification rate of the physical examination reports were measured respectively.Results:The results showed that the timely notification rate of important abnormal results (99.4% vs 96.6%), follow-up rate of “four-high” population (hypertension 95.1% vs 91.2%, hyperglycemia 95.3% vs 91.6%, hyperlipidemia 94.6% vs 92.3%, hyperuricemia 92.7% vs 86.4%), satisfaction rate of physical examination (physical examination environment 94.0% vs 91.3%, service attitude 96.4% vs 91.9%, waiting time 97.6% vs 95.4%, physical examination process 98.3% vs 96.8%, professional level of medical staff 97.2% vs 95.1%), and qualified rate of physical examination report (accuracy of input information 99.5% vs 98.1%, accuracy of main examination conclusion 99.4% vs 97.3%, normative sorting 99.8% vs 98.8%, rationality of health advice 99.2% vs 96.8%) in the experimental group were significantly higher than those in the control group (all P<0.05). Conclusion:The establishment of a multi-level quality control system in health examination service can improve the timely notification rate of important abnormal results, the follow-up rate of the “four-high” population, the satisfaction of physical examinees, and the qualified rate of physical examination reports.