QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]
Author:
Keyword(s):
Year:  Vol:  Page: 

   

 

This Article
* Extract Freely available
* Reprint (PDF)
* Submit a response to this article
* Alert me when this article is cited
* Alert me when Comments are posted
* Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
* E-mail this article to a friend
* Similar articles in this journal
* Alert me to new issues of the journal
* Add to My Personal Archive
* Download to Citation Manager
*Reprints & Permissions
Citing Articles
* Citing Articles via HighWire
* Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
* Search for Related Content

Quality Of Care

Bridging The Quality Gap


PROLOGUE: As long as there have been doctors, there have been problems with quality of care, since no human being (or system run by human beings) is perfect. Despite numerous efforts by government agencies, providers, and health care professionals to improve health care delivery and patient safety, many people still believe that the system needs a serious overhaul. In a recent report the Institute of Medicine called on Congress to speed the reengineering of American health care, which it characterized as "a tangled, highly fragmented web that often wastes resources by providing unnecessary services and duplicating efforts, leaving unaccountable gaps in care."

Bridging the quality gap is a complex undertaking. And complexity breeds error. A key issue for policymakers, providers, and consumers is how to reduce medical errors and other quality problems, which in the United States cause some 98,000 deaths each year, thousands of injuries, and untold suffering. What can be done to make health care safer and more effective? How can the United States revamp its trillion-dollar system, which has the capacity to produce the best health care in the world but so often fails to do so? Can we find a way to sustain quality and patient safety as front-and-center issues on the U.S. policy agenda?

The papers in this section explore what can be done now to make quality count. First, John Ayanian, of Harvard University, and Thomas Quinn, of the U.K. Department of Health, highlight lessons learned from efforts to improve quality of care for coronary heart disease in the United States and England. Next, Elise Becher and Mark Chassin, of the Mount Sinai School of Medicine, present a multifaceted strategy to eliminate barriers and effect system change. And last, RAND’s Elizabeth McGlynn and Robert Brook offer their analysis of the quality problem and steps that they believe can have immediate, positive results.


Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
The Diabetes EducatorHome page
E. B. Fisher, C. A. Brownson, M. L. O'Toole, V. V. Anwuri, and G. Shetty
Perspectives on Self-Management From the Diabetes Initiative of the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation
The Diabetes Educator, June 1, 2007; 33(Supplement_6): 216S - 224S.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Diabetes Spectr.Home page
D. Anderson, C. Horton, M. L. O'Toole, C. A. Brownson, P. Fazzone, and E. B. Fisher
Integrating Depression Care With Diabetes Care in Real-World Settings: Lessons From the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation Diabetes Initiative
Diabetes Spectr, January 1, 2007; 20(1): 10 - 16.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]



Home | Current Issue | Archives | Topic Collections | Search | Blog | Subscribe | Contact Us | Help

© 2001-2001 Project HOPE–The People-to-People Organization
Terms and Policies