Paper Title
ASSESSING HOSPITAL QUALITY MEASUREMENT PROGRAMS: A COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF ISRAEL AND ENGLAND
Abstract
I. INTRODUCTION
In Israel and various countries globally, there are quality measurement programs in place, aiming to oversee and track quality indicators to enhance the standards of healthcare provision. These programs are implemented specifically within hospitals, with Israel and England being notable examples.
Objectives: This study aims to compare the quality measurement programs implemented in hospitals in Israel and England, focusing on the processes involved in indicator determination, data collection methods, and approaches to reporting and publishing the collected data. By examining the similarities and differences between these programs, we will also analyze the performance rates of comparable indicators in both countries.
Research methods: This research undertook a comprehensive literature review to gain insights into the quality measurement programs implemented in hospitals in both Israel and England. Furthermore, designated websites dedicated to these programs were examined to obtain additional information, facilitating a more in-depth understanding of their respective features and characteristics.
Results: Our findings reveal distinct organizational structures for quality measurement programs in Israel and England. In Israel, the Ministry of Health's quality department takes a comprehensive approach, collaborating with officials from the Medical Association to determine indicators. Conversely, in England, the NHS assumes program responsibility but engages in partnerships with other relevant bodies, distributing shared responsibilities.
Both Israel and England incorporate common indicators in their respective quality measurement programs, covering topics such as acute myocardial infarction, cerebrovascular accidents, and femoral neck fractures, among others. While some indicators are identical across these subjects, variations exist. Additionally, the programs in each country encompass unique areas of measurement, highlighting the diverse focus areas addressed by the respective quality measurement initiatives
We also found four indicators that are common to both hospital quality measurement programs in Israel and England. Strikingly, the results of hospitals in Israel outperformed those in England across all four indicators, despite the presence of a rewards system in England and its absence in Israel. The likely reason behind this discrepancy is that the Israeli program sets specific targets for these indicators, whereas England does not establish such targets.
Conclusions: Recognizing the potential for knowledge exchange, this study emphasizes the importance of both Israel and England learning from each other's experiences to enhance the quality of health services provided in their respective countries. By embracing a collaborative approach, valuable insights can be shared, leading to improvements in healthcare delivery and outcomes.