0 111

Cited 9 times in

What is the best practical survey method for the comparative assessment of palliative care services: results from a national quality assessment project in Korea

DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.author박은철-
dc.date.accessioned2018-05-10T06:33:28Z-
dc.date.available2018-05-10T06:33:28Z-
dc.date.issued2011-
dc.identifier.issn0885-3924-
dc.identifier.urihttps://ir.ymlib.yonsei.ac.kr/handle/22282913/158192-
dc.description.abstractCONTEXT : There is an increasing need for the comparative assessment of palliative care services; however, few systematic empirical studies have been performed to determine the most feasible, representative, efficient survey method. OBJECTIVES : To investigate the feasibility, representativeness, and efficiency of several survey methods. METHODS : This study was performed as a part of a national initiative to develop a system to evaluate the quality of palliative care services. Three separate but related surveys of patients, caregivers, and bereaved family members were conducted. These surveys were designed to simulate an independent assessment in a nationwide quality evaluation project. RESULTS : The effective response rates for the patient, caregiver, and bereavement surveys were 30.4% (105 of 344), 46.5% (160 of 344), and 20.9% (501 of 2398), respectively. Subjects who responded to the patient and caregiver surveys were likely to have better physical and mental conditions, whereas subjects who responded to the bereaved family survey did not differ significantly from nonrespondents in regard to patient characteristics, except for a small difference in patient gender (females: 47.2% vs. 41.7%, P=0.028). The average number of responses per institution was 3.2, 4.8, and 15.2, respectively. The cost of the patient and caregiver surveys was much higher than the cost of the bereaved family member survey. CONCLUSION : There were significant differences between the three methods. Despite the low response rate, our findings suggest that the bereaved family member survey has strengths in terms of feasibility and efficiency, and could be considered as a practical option for the comparative assessment of palliative care services by an independent body.-
dc.description.statementOfResponsibilityrestriction-
dc.languageEnglish-
dc.publisherElsevier-
dc.relation.isPartOfJOURNAL OF PAIN AND SYMPTOM MANAGEMENT-
dc.rightsCC BY-NC-ND 2.0 KR-
dc.rightshttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/2.0/kr/-
dc.subject.MESHAdult-
dc.subject.MESHAged-
dc.subject.MESHAged, 80 and over-
dc.subject.MESHCaregivers-
dc.subject.MESHCholestasis-
dc.subject.MESHFemale-
dc.subject.MESHHealth Care Surveys/methods*-
dc.subject.MESHHealth Services Needs and Demand-
dc.subject.MESHHumans-
dc.subject.MESHMale-
dc.subject.MESHMiddle Aged-
dc.subject.MESHPalliative Care/standards*-
dc.subject.MESHPneumonia-
dc.subject.MESHQuality Assurance, Health Care/methods*-
dc.subject.MESHRepublic of Korea-
dc.titleWhat is the best practical survey method for the comparative assessment of palliative care services: results from a national quality assessment project in Korea-
dc.typeArticle-
dc.contributor.collegeCollege of Medicine-
dc.contributor.departmentDept. of Preventive Medicine-
dc.contributor.googleauthorDong Wook Shin-
dc.contributor.googleauthorJi Eun Choi-
dc.contributor.googleauthorJung Hoe Kim-
dc.contributor.googleauthorJi Soo Joo-
dc.contributor.googleauthorJin Young Choi-
dc.contributor.googleauthorJina Kang-
dc.contributor.googleauthorYoung Ji Baek-
dc.contributor.googleauthorHa Na Mo-
dc.contributor.googleauthorJong Hyock Park-
dc.contributor.googleauthorEun Cheol Park-
dc.identifier.doi10.1016/j.jpainsymman.2010.11.023-
dc.contributor.localIdA01618-
dc.relation.journalcodeJ01676-
dc.identifier.eissn1873-6513-
dc.identifier.pmid21458215-
dc.identifier.urlhttps://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0885392411000686-
dc.contributor.alternativeNamePark, Eun Chul-
dc.contributor.affiliatedAuthorPark, Eun Chul-
dc.citation.volume42-
dc.citation.number2-
dc.citation.startPage251-
dc.citation.endPage264-
dc.identifier.bibliographicCitationJOURNAL OF PAIN AND SYMPTOM MANAGEMENT, Vol.42(2) : 251-264, 2011-
Appears in Collections:
1. College of Medicine (의과대학) > Dept. of Preventive Medicine and Public Health (예방의학교실) > 1. Journal Papers

qrcode

Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.