Skip Navigation


International Journal for Quality in Health Care Advance Access originally published online on January 24, 2006
International Journal for Quality in Health Care 2006 18(2):79-80; doi:10.1093/intqhc/mzi099
This Article
Right arrow Full Text Freely available
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
18/2/79    most recent
mzi099v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (8)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Mainz, J.
Right arrow Articles by Bartels, P. D.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Mainz, J.
Right arrow Articles by Bartels, P. D.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

International Journal for Quality in Health Care vol. 18 no. 2 © The Author 2006. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of International Society for Quality in Health Care; all rights reserved

Editorial

Nationwide quality improvement—how are we doing and what can we do?

The first 10% of the full text of this article appears below.

Quality improvement frameworks and methods have developed over the last 100 years.

Ernest Codman developed his End Result System at the beginning of last century, suggesting that all patients should have their outcomes evaluated at discharge and one year after [1].

In the 1920s, Flexner evolved his Hospital Standardization Program, which in 1951 developed into the foundation of Joint Commission of Healthcare Organizations, which now accredit more than 85% of all health organizations in the United States . . . [Full Text of this Article]

The question is then: how are we doing?

The question is then: what can we do?

Jan Mainz and Paul D. Bartels

The National Indicator Project, The County of Aarhus, Hoejbjerg, Denmark


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Int J Qual Health CareHome page
S. Kristensen, J. Mainz, and P. Bartels
Selection of indicators for continuous monitoring of patient safety: recommendations of the project 'safety improvement for patients in Europe'
Int. J. Qual. Health Care, June 1, 2009; 21(3): 169 - 175.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Eur. J. Cardiothorac. Surg.Home page
E. Jakobsen, T. Palshof, K. Osterlind, and H. Pilegaard
Data from a national lung cancer registry contributes to improve outcome and quality of surgery: Danish results
Eur. J. Cardiothorac. Surg., February 1, 2009; 35(2): 348 - 352.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Scand J Public HealthHome page
S. Oltedal, A. Garratt, O. Bjertnaes, M. Bjornsdottir, M. Freil, and M. Sachs
The NORPEQ patient experiences questionnaire: Data quality, internal consistency and validity following a Norwegian inpatient survey
Scand J Public Health, October 1, 2007; 35(5): 540 - 547.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 American Journal of Medical QualityHome page
C.-R. Chien and M.-S. Lai
Trends in the Pattern of Care for Lung Cancer and Their Correlation With New Clinical Evidence: Experiences in a University-Affiliated Medical Center
American Journal of Medical Quality, November 1, 2006; 21(6): 408 - 414.
[Abstract] [PDF]