Search PubMedSearch

Biomedical subjects

M Osterweis

Publications and source records attributed to M Osterweis.

5 recordsLinked to original sources

The U.S. hospice movement: issues in development.

A grass-roots hospice care movement is underway in the United States modeled after recently popularized British hospice programs. Hospice care is intended to help the terminally ill maintain a personally acceptable quality of life until death. Attention should be given to ensuring the future viability of this service option by allowing for experimentation with and adaptation of existing models, and by integrating it with the overall health care system. Issues to be considered in integrating hospice care include utilization of existing resources, regional planning, standards and licensure, and reimbursement opportunities. Although hospice care may not have an immediate cost savings impact on the health care system, it could develop this capacity in the future. Such impact would not only assure a stable financial base for hospice care but would also affect bed use generally. Continuing dialogue among providers, consumers, and policy makers of various backgrounds is necessary to the effective and appropriate development of hospice care in the U.S.

Health Resources

Assessing technical performance at diverse ambulatory care sites.

The purpose of the large study reported here was to develop and test methods for assessing the quality of health care that would be broadly applicable to diverse ambulatory care organizations for periodic comparative review. Methodological features included the use of an age-sex stratified random sampling scheme, dependence on medical records as the source of data, a fixed study period year, use of Kessner's tracer methodology (including not only acute and chronic diseases but also screening and immunization rates as indicators), and a fixed tracer matrix at all test sites. This combination of methods proved more efficacious in estimating certain parameters for the total patient populations at each site (including utilization patterns, screening, and immunization rates) and the process of care for acute conditions than it did in examining the process of care for the selected chronic condition. It was found that the actual process of care at all three sites for the three acute conditions (streptococcal pharyngitis, urinary tract infection, and iron deficiency anemia) often differed from the expected process in terms of both diagnostic procedures and treatment. For hypertension, the chronic disease tracer, medical records were frequently a deficient data source from which to draw conclusions about the adequacy of treatment. Several aspects of the study methodology were found to be detrimental to between-site comparisons of the process of care for chronic disease management. The use of an age-sex stratified random sampling scheme resulted in the identification of too few cases of hypertension at some sites for analytic purposes, thereby necessitating supplementary sampling by diagnosis. The use of a fixed study period year resulted in an arbitrary starting point in the course of the disease. Furthermore, in light of the diverse sociodemographic characteristics of the patient populations, the use of a fixed matrix of tracer conditions for all test sites is questionable. The discussion centers on these and other problems encountered in attempting to compare technical performance within diverse ambulatory care organizations and provides some guidelines as to the utility of alternative methods for assessing the quality of health care.

Adolescent

Curing and caring -- a proposed method for self-assessment in primary care organizations.

Key research in the area of quality assessment is reviewed and a method for periodic assessment in primary care organizations is proposed. The suggested approach is designed for administrative, rather than research, purposes. Therefore, it focuses on indicators that are both practical and realistic for use in periodic monitoring. The proposed method is two-staged and includes both technical performance (curing) and satisfaction (caring). At the first level of evaluation, general areas of performance are examined; these are key performance indicators in prevention, diagnosis, and management of illness, and questionnaires dealing with the accessibility and acceptability of care, coupled with objective measures of satisfaction. Those areas of performance that are not up to management standards are then examined in greater detail at the second level of evaluation. Using this approach, organizations can build a longitudinal picture of performance and chart their progress annually.

Consumer Behavior