Key result
Public reporting of safety and quality data in the Australian health care system has evolved to a more systemic approach, though its effectiveness in driving change remains debated.
Discusses the evolution and effectiveness of public reporting systems for safety and quality in the Australian healthcare system.
Public reporting's debated effectiveness in Australia cautions against over-reliance; leaves open its impact on care quality and requires prospective evaluation.
The pursuit of demonstrable safety and quality in health care is an evolving process; there has been notable progress in measuring safety and quality in Australia. The first attempts to measure outcomes were in the field of anaesthesia, while national perinatal mortality reports have provided clinically useful information for many years. Nationwide reporting by the Quality in Australian Health Care Study (QAHCS) in 2005 triggered a more systemic approach to safety and quality. Systemic reporting has begun to emerge in anaesthesia and surgery, for implantable devices, perinatal services and sentinel events; in some jurisdictions, statewide incident data are now reported annually. While debate continues about the issue of individual clinician performance, the real issue is the effectiveness of any reporting system to bring about change in both safety and quality.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Hughes et al. (2006) conducted a review in Healthcare safety and quality. Public reporting of safety and quality data was evaluated. Public reporting of safety and quality data in the Australian health care system has evolved to a more systemic approach, though its effectiveness in driving change remains debated.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: