ArticleSchmerz (Berlin, Germany)2012
[Quality management in acute pain therapy: results from a survey of certified hospitals].
Article in Schmerz (Berlin, Germany), 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- A systematic review of hospital accreditation: the challenges of measuring complex intervention effects.BMC health services research · 2015Pooled it
- Article
- [Healthcare services research on pain in Germany. A survey].Schmerz (Berlin, Germany) · 2015Article
- [Pain therapy options in trauma and emergency surgery].Der Unfallchirurg · 2013Article
- [Anesthesiological acute pain therapy in Germany: telephone-based survey].Der Anaesthesist · 2013Article
- [Quality in (acute) pain therapy: plea for a paradigm shift].Schmerz (Berlin, Germany) · 2012Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
9 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimSystems for and methods of quality management are increasingly being implemented in public health services. The aim of our study was to analyze the current state of the integrated quality management concept "quality management acute pain therapy" of the TÜV Rheinland® (TÜV) after a 5-year project period. MATERIAL AND
methodsGeneral characteristics of the participating hospitals, number of departments certified by the TÜV and implementation of structures and processes according to the TÜV guidelines were evaluated by a mail questionnaire. Furthermore, positive and negative aspects concerning the effects of certification were evaluated by the hospitals' representatives of certification.
resultsA total of 36 questionnaires were returned. Since 2006 the number of certified hospitals (2011: n = 48) and surgical departments (2011: n = 202) has increased continuously. The number of certified medical departments is low (2011: n = 39); however, in the last 3 years, it has increased by about 200-300% annually. Standard operative procedures for pain therapy and measurement of pain intensity at regular intervals were implemented in all certified clinics (100%). Although 41% take part in the benchmarking project QUIPS (Quality Improvement in Postoperative Pain Therapy), 24% do not systematically check the quality of the outcome of pain management. Acceptance of the new pain therapy concepts among nursing staff was rated positively (ratio positive:negative 16:1); however, acceptance among physicians was rated negatively (1:15).
conclusionCertification by the TÜV leads to sustainable implementation of quality management principles. Future efforts should focus on better integration of physicians in acute pain therapy and the development of an integrated tool to measure patients' outcome.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.