Establishing gold standards for System-Level Measures: A modified Delphi consensus process

10Citations
Citations of this article
33Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Objective: To establish aspirational ‘gold standards’ for a suite of System-Level Measures (SLMs) being used by Counties Manukau Health (CM Health), a New Zealand (NZ) District Health Board. Design: This study employed a multi-stage, multi-method modified Delphi consensus process. Setting: The Delphi consensus process involved virtual (email) communication between participants (Round 1) and a structured face-to-face meeting (Round 2) held in Auckland, NZ. Participants: Participants comprised of health professionals, managers, academics and quality improvement experts with an interest in the use of SLMs. Interventions: Participants in the first round received a letter requesting their participation in an anonymous Delphi. The second round involved national and international health system experts taking part in a structured, facilitated face-to-face meeting. Participants reviewed 15 SLMs in total. The SLMs all related to the three domains of the Triple Aim: Population Health, e.g. life expectancy at birth; Patient Experience of Care, e.g. rate of adverse events; and Cost and Productivity, e.g. healthcare expenditure per capita. Main Outcome Measures: For a proposed gold standard to be agreed and established for each SLM. Results: Twelve participants took part in Round 1, with 19 participating in Round 2. The process established agreement on a gold standard for each of the 15 reviewed SLMs. Conclusion: We demonstrated that the Delphi consensus process can be used to establish gold standards for a suite of SLMs used by a NZ Health Board (CM Health).

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Doolan-Noble, F., Barson, S., Lyndon, M., Cullinane, F., Gray, J., Stokes, T., & Gauld, R. (2019). Establishing gold standards for System-Level Measures: A modified Delphi consensus process. International Journal for Quality in Health Care, 31(3), 205–211. https://doi.org/10.1093/intqhc/mzy122

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free