The aim of this study was to determine whether the widely adopted Institute of Medicine’s dimensions of quality capture the current meaning of quality in health care literature.
Design:
An integrative review was utilised as there has been a multitude of published papers defining quality in relation to health care, therefore collective analysis may provide new insight and understanding.
Method:
Papers offering a definition or conceptual understanding of quality in relation to health care were identified by searching relevant databases. Papers were excluded according to predefined criteria. An integrative review was conducted and the Institute of Medicine’s dimensions were used as a framework for data extraction and analysis.
Findings:
The review identified two important additional dimensions of quality; namely caring and navigating the health care system and argues that they require recognition as dimensions in their own right.
Conclusion:
In the current climate of constrained finances there is a risk that the allocation of resources is directed to current explicit dimensions to the detriment of others. The result may be a reduction in health care quality, rather than improvement.
AttreeM (2001) Patients’ relatives’ experiences and perspectives of ‘good’ and ‘not so good’ quality care. Journal of Advanced Nursing. 33(4): 456–460.
2.
BakerR (2001) Principles of quality improvement: Part one – defining quality. Journal of Clinical Governance. 9(2): 89–91.
3.
BareldsAVan de GoorIVan HeckG (2009a) Quality of care and service trajectories for people with intellectual disabilities: Defining the aspects of quality from the client’s perspective. Scandinavian Journal of Caring Science. 24(1): 164–174.
4.
BareldsAVan de GoorIBosM (2009b) Care and some trajectories for people with intellectual disabilities: Defining course and quality determinants from the client’s perspective. Journal of Policy and Practice Intellectual Disabilities. 6: 163–172.
5.
BassettS (2010) What defines good nursing?Nursing Management (Harrow). 16(10): 13–13.
6.
BlumenthalD (1996) Quality of health care Part 4: The origins of the quality of care debate. New England Journal of Medicine. 335(15): 1146–1149.
7.
BraunsteinJ (2003) Defining quality diabetes care in the new health system. Current Diabetes Report. 3(4): 269–271.
8.
BrookR (1973) Critical issues in the assessment of quality of care and their relationships to HMOs. Journal of Medical Education. 48: 114–134.
9.
BrookRMcGlynnEShekelleP (2000) Defining and measuring quality of care: A perspective from US researchers. International Journal for Quality in Health Care. 12(4): 281–295.
10.
CampbellSRolandMBuetowS (2000) Defining quality of care. Social Science and Medicine. 51(11): 1611–1625.
11.
CastillaJHernandezJCabelloY (2008) Defining poor and optimum performance in an IVF programme. Human Reproduction. 23(1): 85–90.
12.
Centre for Reviews and Dissemination (2009) Systematic Reviews: CRD’s Guidance for Undertaking Reviews in Health Care. University of York. January: pp.10,24.
13.
ChilgrenA (2008) Managers and the new definition of quality. Journal of Healthcare Management. 53(4): 221–229.
14.
CollignonPLookeDFergusonJ (2002) Surveillance definitions for multi-resistant organisms (MROs). Australian Infection Control. 7(3): i–iv.
15.
Deming E (1986) Out of the Crisis. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
16.
Department of Health (2008) High Quality Care for All. June. Gateway reference: 10106.
17.
DonabedianA (1980) Explorations in Quality Assessment and Monitoring, Vol.1, The Definition of Quality and Approaches to its Assessment. Ann Arbour, MI: Health Admin Press.
18.
EnglishE (2002) Quality care: All want it; let’s define it. Minnesota Medicine. 85(5): 7–44.
19.
FristB (2000) Letters to the editor…definition of “quality healthcare”. Journal for Healthcare Quality: Promoting Excellence in Healthcare. 22(1): 7–7.
20.
HaggertyJBurgeFLevesqueJ (2007) Operational definitions of attributes of primary health care: Consensus among Canadian experts. Annals of Family Medicine. 5(4): 336–344.
21.
HeenanMKhanHBinkleyD (2010) From boardroom to bedside: How to define and measure hospital quality. Healthcare Quarterly. 13(1): 55–60.
HowieJHeaneyDMaxwellM (2004) Quality, core values and the general practice consultation: Issues of definition, measurement and delivery. Family Practice. 21(4): 458–468.
24.
HyderA (2002) Structural adjustment in health in Pakistan: Defining the questions. International Journal of Epidemiology. 31(2): 509–514.
25.
Institute of Medicine (1990) Medicare: A Strategy for Quality Assurance. Washington DC: National Academy Press.
26.
Institute of Medicine (2001) Crossing the Quality Chasm: A New Health System for 21st Century. Washington DC: National Academy Press. Available at: http://books.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=10027&page=R1 (accessed 10 November 2010).
27.
JonesA (2010) Defining quality. Health Service Journal. 120(6200): 14–14.
28.
LarrabeeJBoldenL (2001) Defining patient-perceived quality of nursing care. Journal of Nursing Care Quality. 16(1): 34–60.
29.
ManningB (2006) Wisconsin Medical Society embarks on campaign to define high-quality care. Wisconsin Medical Journal. 105(6): 11–11.
30.
MaxwellRJ (1984) Quality assessment in health. British Medical Journal. 288: 1470–1472.
31.
MeyerBBishopD (2007) Florence Nightingale: Nineteenth century apostle of quality. Journal of Management History. 13(3): 240–254.
32.
MoherDLiberatiATetzlaffJ (2009) Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: The PRISMA statement. PloS Med. 6(7): e10000097–e10000097.
NelsonJPuntilloKPronovostP (2010) In their own words: Patients and families define high quality palliative care in the intensive care unit. Critical Care Medicine. 38(3): 808–818.
35.
O’ReillyP (2007) Involving service users in defining and evaluating the service quality of a disability service. International Journal of Health Care Quality. 20(2–3): 116–129.
36.
OvretveitJ (1992) Health Service Quality: An Introduction to Quality Methods for Health Services. Oxford: Blackwell Scientific.
37.
RussellT (2007) From my perspective: The fragmented and labyrinthine schematics that define our current health care system regularly frustrate surgeons’ efforts to deliver, and patients’ attempts to receive, optimal care. Bulletin of the American College of Surgeons. 92(11): 4–5.
SipkoffM (2004) The new consensus favouring IOM’s definition of quality. Managed Care. 13(6): 18–21.
40.
SirotaR (2006) Defining error in anatomic pathology. Archives of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine. 103(5): 604–606.
41.
Sixma H, Kerssens J, Campen C, et al. (1998) Quality of care from the patients’ perspective: From theoretical concept to new measuring instrument. Health Expectations 1: 82–95. Available at: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1046/j.1369-6513.1998.00004.x/pdf (accessed 26 January 2011).
42.
SofaerSFirmingerK (2005) Patient perceptions of the quality of health services. Annual Review Public Health. 26: 513–559.
43.
WhittemoreRKnaflK (2005) The integrative review: An updated methodology. Journal of Advanced Nursing. 52(5): 546–553.
44.
WilliamsJ (2000) Information defines quality. Texas Medicine. 96(10): 9–11.
