運用系統性檢核機制以提升數值之正確性－以TCPI綜合照護指標為例

Using a systematic approach to improve data accuracy: An example of TCPI

張郁平(Yu-Ping Chang) ； 林淑美(Su-Mei Lin) ； 邱逸淳(Yi-Chun Chiu) ； 詹尚易(Shang-Yih Chan) ； 翁林仲(Lin-Chung Woung) ； 蔡志婕(Chih-Chieh Tsai)

《醫療品質雜誌》 12卷2期 (2018/03) Pp. 60-65

摘要

前言：自2015年1月起，將TCPI綜合照護指標由人工收集，改由人工、自動化與半自動化方法透過系統收集，目的在於探討改變數值收集方式，其因應機制以提升數值正確性。方法： 本院建置驗證方法包含(1)制定指標收案流程規範；(2)擴大驗證防呆；(3)建立稽核制度；(4)數值前後期比較；(5)交叉檢查；(6)新增HIS清單下載功能；(7)瞭解臨床執行併入流程；(8)專人至院區說明系統介接規則；(9)專人解決使用過程遇到之問題。結果及討論： 個案醫院指標系統已穩定，原52%曾有介接錯誤問題，已降至0%。建立前可參考之報表僅37.6%，建立後已至100%。未來將擴大運用建置緊急醫院能力分級評定指標、P4P指標等，藉由資訊幫助減少錯誤的產生，提升數據收集的正確性。

並列摘要

Introduction: Since January 2015, To-Complete Performance Index indicators have been collected by an indicator system instead of manually. This study aimed to evaluate the effect of this innovative computational collection on data accuracy. Method: The assessment methods were: 1. develop a data collection SOP; 2. extend foolproof validation; 3. establish an audit system; 4. compare pre- and postdata; 5. cross-examine; 6. create an HIS list download function; 7. understand the clinical implementation of the merger process; 8. provide system orientation instructions between branches; and 9. assign responsible authorities to solve problems and issues with the collective system. Results and conclusion: The reliability of the indicator system was improved; the interfacing error decreased from 52% to 0%. In addition, data validity improved from 37.6% in a previous assessment to 100%. In the near future, we will extend the use of hospital emergency capacity grading assessment indicators and P4P indicators. With these supportive statistical data, we hope to reduce data errors and improve overall data accuracy.