Evaluating Health Care Programs and Systems
The evaluation of health care is vitally important to our efforts directed at reforming and improving the performance of our health care system. Evaluation is a means by which a program or a process is examined and an informed judgment is made concerning the extent of success in reaching predetermined goals. Evaluation plays two major roles in health care: (1) assuring the delivery of high quality care, and (2) providing a tool for controlling costs and promoting accountability for public program expenditures. Evaluation is not merely the application of methods; it involves managerial and political decision making pertinent to the allocation of resources to other functions such as program planning, design, implementation, and ongoing monitoring. Evaluations are done for a variety of purposes: to improve the delivery of care, to test an innovation, to determine the effectiveness of regulatory policy, or to assess the appropriateness of continuing or altering an intervention. The use of epidemiologic principles and methods in the evaluation process can clarify information required for program development or guide decisions relevant to continued operations. In addition, epidemiology provides measures, analytic study designs, and methods for investigating the effectiveness of programs in controlling disease, disability, and other health problems and for measuring their consequences in populations receiving health care services.
KeywordsHealth Maintenance Organization Birth Center Lower Confidence Limit Epidemiologic Method Blood Pressure Screening
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- Bibeau, D., Mullen, K., McLeroy, K., Green, L., and Foshee, V., 1988, Evaluations of workplace smoking cessation programs: A critique, Am. J. Prey. Med. 4:87–95.Google Scholar
- Bollen, K., 1989, Structural Equations with Latent Variables,John Wiley & Sons, New York.Google Scholar
- Box, G. E. P., and Jenkins, G. M., 1976, Time Series Analysis: Forecasting and Control, Holden-Day, San Francisco.Google Scholar
- Cox, D. R., Regression models and life-tables, J. R. Statist. Soc. B34:187–220.Google Scholar
- Donabedian, A., 1980, Explorations in Quality Assessment and Monitoring,Vol. I: The Definition of Quality and Approaches to Its Assessment, Health Administration Press, Ann Arbor, MI.Google Scholar
- Health Care Financing Administration, 1992, Medicare Hospital Information, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
- Joreskog, K. G., and Sorbom, D., 1993, Lisrel 8 with Prelis 2, Scientific Software International, Chicago.Google Scholar
- Kahn, H. A., and Sempos, C. T., 1989, Statistical Methods in Epidemiology,Oxford University Press, New York.Google Scholar
- Knaus, W. A., Draper, E. A., and Wagner, D. R, 1983, Toward quality review in intensive care: The APACHE system, Quality Rev. Bull. 9:(7):196–204.Google Scholar
- Levy, R. S., and Lemeshow, S., 1980, Sampling for Health Professionals, Lifetime Learning, Belmont, CA.Google Scholar
- National Institute on Drug Abuse, 1985, National Household Survey on Drug Abuse: 1985 Population Estimates, National Institute on Drug Abuse, Rockville, MD.Google Scholar
- Warner, K., and Luce, B. R., 1982, Cost—Benefit and Cost—Effectiveness Analysis in Health Care: Principles, Practice, and Potential, Health Administration Press, Ann Arbor, MI.Google Scholar