PubMed · 15168887
The source did not provide an abstract. Follow the original record for more information.
Explore connections, maps & timelines
Kathy Hansen, Don Lavanty. 2004. Equivalent quality control.. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/15168887/
Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.
KEEP EXPLORING
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
OBJECTIVE: To identify comprehensive pediatric hospitals on the basis of publicly available data. STUDY DESIGN: We developed identification criteria for comprehensive pediatric hospitals, then evaluated the number of hospitals meeting these selection criteria. Criteria for a comprehensive pediatric hospital included pediatric residency accreditation, pediatric inpatient volume, and diversity of pediatric disorders at each hospital. New York State hospital administrative discharge data were analyzed for patients 0 to 14 years of age, excluding neonatal diagnoses. RESULTS: Infants and children (n = 125,588) with 375 different diagnosis-related groups were discharged from 230 hospitals in 2000. Through the use of higher selective criteria (educational accreditation plus both high volume and diversity in the top decile), 11 comprehensive pediatric hospitals were identified. These hospitals serve populations of 1.7 +/- 0.3 million (mean +/- SD) each, with 8 referral regions throughout the state, collectively providing care for 29% of all pediatric statewide hospitalizations. CONCLUSIONS: Comprehensive pediatric hospitals serve the population of New York widely and evenly. The ability to identify pediatric hospitals will permit evaluation of the relative quality of care and suggest appropriate regulatory interventions to improve pediatric hospital utilization.
OBJECTIVES: To identify issues surrounding the future training needs of the specialist public health workforce following the most recent restructuring of the National Health Service (NHS) in England. METHODS: All directors of public health (DsPH) based in strategic health authorities and nine senior staff working in public health at the regional level were invited to participate in a semi-structured telephone interview. RESULTS: Twenty-six people were interviewed. Many interviewees expressed concern that because consultants and specialists in public health will be working in much smaller teams than hitherto, they will have to generalize their skills to cover a much wider range of functions (including board-level duties). This may result in a loss of specialist expertise. Successful public health practice in the new structures will require new ways of interorganizational working that will add an administrative burden to specialists in public health. Also, the creation of a board-level post in each primary care trust (PCT) has resulted in more time spent on corporate responsibilities and less on public health for DsPH, who are often the only fully trained specialist in public health in their PCT. Furthermore, interviewees expressed their anxiety about the lack of diversity in the posts available to specialists in public health and particularly to those newly completing their specialist training. Generally, interviewees felt that traditional public health roles and responsibilities were being eclipsed by corporate and managerial ones. Professional development activities were being carried out, but in a rather ad-hoc fashion. Interviewees were hopeful that public health networks would lead professional development initiatives once they were more established. CONCLUSIONS: It is important that excellence in public health is maintained through a set of accreditable standards, whilst corporate skills, essential to successful public health practice in the new UK NHS, are developed among specialists in public health.