Study Guide

Objective

After completing the course, the student is able to:
- Define structure, service and outcome quality and meaning of quality assurance from the different perspectives
- Identify and apply prevailing quality assessment methods and quality standards within social and health care
- Describe the most central quality management systems within social- and health care
- Integrate quality assurance and quality improvement to her/his professional duties
- Plan and implement evaluation of one’s work field/activity/operation

Content

- Perspective on quality management, quality policy, quality system
- Quality standards within social and health care organization
- Quality assurance, quality improvement and control as well as methods for constant quality improvement
- Central quality management systems in Finland within social and health care

Location and time

Spring 2022 -WebEx

Materials

Agapoff, J. R., Goebert, D., Takeshita, J., Kracher, S., & Currivan, A. (2020). Improving Patient Care through Collaborative Consultation Integration: a Quality Improvement Initiative. Journal of Behavioral Health Services & Research, 47(1), 139–145. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11414-019-09666-4.
Algurén, B., Jernberg, T., Vasko, P., Selb, M., & Coenen, M. (2021). Content comparison and person-centeredness of standards for quality improvement in cardiovascular health care. PLoS ONE, 16(1), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0244874
BİLEN, A., & SITKI, A. (2020). The Impact of Total Qualıty Management on Patıent Satısfactıon: A Fıeld Study in the Health Centers of the Syrıans in Gazıantep. Journal of Arts & Social Sciences, 7(1), 11–20.
Ball, S. L., Weiner, S. J., Schwartz, A., Altman, L., Binns-Calvey, A., Chan, C., Falck-Ytter, C., Frenchman, M., Gee, B., Jackson, J. L., Jordan, N., Kass, B., Kelly, B., Safdar, N., Scholcoff, C., Sharma, G., Subramaniam, S., Weaver, F., & Wopat, M. (2021). Implementation of a patient-collected audio recording audit & feedback quality improvement program to prevent contextual error: stakeholder perspective. BMC Health Services Research, 21(1), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-021-06921-3.
Cochrane, D. (2014). Securing patient safety through quality assurance in a mixed economy of healthcare: The role of accreditation. Clinical Risk, 20(4), 82–89. https://doi.org/10.1177/1356262214542520
Gaboury, I., Breton, M., Perreault, K., Bordeleau, F., Descôteaux, S., Maillet, L., Hudon, C., Couturier, Y., Duhoux, A., Vachon, B., Cossette, B., Rodrigues, I., Poitras, M.-E., Loignon, C., & Vasiliadis, H.-M. (2021). Interprofessional advanced access – a quality improvement protocol for expanding access to primary care services. BMC Health Services Research, 21(1), 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-021-06839-w
Wagner, C., Gulacsi, L., Takacs, E., & Outinen, M. (2006). The implementation of quality management systems in hospitals: a comparison between three countries. BMC Health Services Research, 6, 50–11. https://doi.org/10.1186/1472-6963-6-50
Sutton, E., Bion, J., Mannion, R., Willars, J., Shaw, E., & Tarrant, C. (2021). A qualitative study of organisational response to national quality standards for 7-day services in English hospitals. BMC Health Services Research, 21(1), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-021-06213-w

Teaching methods

lectures, group discussion, case study

Exam schedules

Instructions for final assignment will be given during the lecture

Completion alternatives

written assignment

Evaluation scale

H-5

Assessment criteria, satisfactory (1)

Assessment criteria for assignment:
The student has followed the instructions and his/hers knowledge of the other students' work is inadequate. The student shows limited substance knowledge, it can be essential. The student shows insufficient knowledge about the other students' assignments. The student has followed the instructions for assignment. She/he have a deficient knowledge of the substance also touching the essential

Assessment criteria, good (3)

Assessment criteria for assignment:
The student has followed the instructions for the assignment and shows insufficient knowledge about the other students' assignments. The student has mastered the substance of his work, but the application is limited

Assessment criteria, excellent (5)

Criteria for evaluation of assignment:
The student has followed the instructions for the assignment and shows that she/he has mastered the substance. She/he have read the other participants' assignments and can ask relevant questions and can lead a discussion at the possible seminar. The assignment and the possible role as an opponent show something out of the ordinary (technical execution, oral presentation, mature reflections, independent working methods)
The student has followed the instructions for the assignment and shows that she/he has mastered the substance. She/he have read the other participants' assignments and can ask relevant questions and lead a discussion at the possible seminar

Assessment methods and criteria

0-5

Qualifications

No prerequisites