Quality Management Systems in the Ambulant Sector: An Analytical Comparison of Different Quality Management Systems

Background: Since 1 January 2004, all physicians, psychotherapists, and medical care centers that are under contract to statutory healthcare in Germany are obliged, according to § 135a Section 2 of the Fifth Social Security Statute Book, to introduce an intra-institutional quality managemen...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Marcus Gumpert, Jens-Peter Reese
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: MDPI AG 2019-02-01
Series:International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health
Subjects:
Online Access:https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/16/3/444
id doaj-b500a25275bf4623bd779166e6b1b6f8
record_format Article
spelling doaj-b500a25275bf4623bd779166e6b1b6f82020-11-24T21:42:21ZengMDPI AGInternational Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health1660-46012019-02-0116344410.3390/ijerph16030444ijerph16030444Quality Management Systems in the Ambulant Sector: An Analytical Comparison of Different Quality Management SystemsMarcus Gumpert0Jens-Peter Reese1Medical Faculty, Philipps-University of Marburg, Karl-von-Frisch-Strasse 4, 35043 Marburg, GermanyCoorsinating Center for Clinical Trials, Philipps-University of Marburg, Karl-von-Frisch-Strasse 4, 35043 Marburg, GermanyBackground: Since 1 January 2004, all physicians, psychotherapists, and medical care centers that are under contract to statutory healthcare in Germany are obliged, according to § 135a Section 2 of the Fifth Social Security Statute Book, to introduce an intra-institutional quality management system. Methods: A total of 24 medical practices were chosen through random sampling. In total, there were 12 family physicians and specialist practices each and eight practices each per quality management system. The analysis was carried out with the help of three specially developed questionnaires (physician, employee, and patient). A total of 26 quality categories with different questions were available in the three survey groups (physicians, employees, and patients). The Kruskal⁻Wallis test checked the extent to which the different scores between the quality management systems were significant and effective for specialists or family physicians. Results: „Quality and Development in Practices (QEP)„ had the highest average score. Due to a specific family practitioner specialism, “Quality management in Saxony medical practices (QisA)„ followed with good average scores. The individual quality categories in the quality management systems, such as the “range of services„ or “allocation of appointments„, received the highest average scores among the specialists. In contrast, categories such as “telephone enquiries„ and “external cooperation and communication„ received the highest average scores among the family physicians. Conclusion: Differences in the evaluation of quality management systems and medical groups (specialists/family physicians) were found in the study. The reasons for these differences could be found in the quality categories.https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/16/3/444quality management systemsquality categoriesoutpatient quality assuranceevaluation in quality managementmanagement systems for contract physicians
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Marcus Gumpert
Jens-Peter Reese
spellingShingle Marcus Gumpert
Jens-Peter Reese
Quality Management Systems in the Ambulant Sector: An Analytical Comparison of Different Quality Management Systems
International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health
quality management systems
quality categories
outpatient quality assurance
evaluation in quality management
management systems for contract physicians
author_facet Marcus Gumpert
Jens-Peter Reese
author_sort Marcus Gumpert
title Quality Management Systems in the Ambulant Sector: An Analytical Comparison of Different Quality Management Systems
title_short Quality Management Systems in the Ambulant Sector: An Analytical Comparison of Different Quality Management Systems
title_full Quality Management Systems in the Ambulant Sector: An Analytical Comparison of Different Quality Management Systems
title_fullStr Quality Management Systems in the Ambulant Sector: An Analytical Comparison of Different Quality Management Systems
title_full_unstemmed Quality Management Systems in the Ambulant Sector: An Analytical Comparison of Different Quality Management Systems
title_sort quality management systems in the ambulant sector: an analytical comparison of different quality management systems
publisher MDPI AG
series International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health
issn 1660-4601
publishDate 2019-02-01
description Background: Since 1 January 2004, all physicians, psychotherapists, and medical care centers that are under contract to statutory healthcare in Germany are obliged, according to § 135a Section 2 of the Fifth Social Security Statute Book, to introduce an intra-institutional quality management system. Methods: A total of 24 medical practices were chosen through random sampling. In total, there were 12 family physicians and specialist practices each and eight practices each per quality management system. The analysis was carried out with the help of three specially developed questionnaires (physician, employee, and patient). A total of 26 quality categories with different questions were available in the three survey groups (physicians, employees, and patients). The Kruskal⁻Wallis test checked the extent to which the different scores between the quality management systems were significant and effective for specialists or family physicians. Results: „Quality and Development in Practices (QEP)„ had the highest average score. Due to a specific family practitioner specialism, “Quality management in Saxony medical practices (QisA)„ followed with good average scores. The individual quality categories in the quality management systems, such as the “range of services„ or “allocation of appointments„, received the highest average scores among the specialists. In contrast, categories such as “telephone enquiries„ and “external cooperation and communication„ received the highest average scores among the family physicians. Conclusion: Differences in the evaluation of quality management systems and medical groups (specialists/family physicians) were found in the study. The reasons for these differences could be found in the quality categories.
topic quality management systems
quality categories
outpatient quality assurance
evaluation in quality management
management systems for contract physicians
url https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/16/3/444
work_keys_str_mv AT marcusgumpert qualitymanagementsystemsintheambulantsectorananalyticalcomparisonofdifferentqualitymanagementsystems
AT jenspeterreese qualitymanagementsystemsintheambulantsectorananalyticalcomparisonofdifferentqualitymanagementsystems
_version_ 1725917387567398912