Are hospital quality improvement and public accountability compatible?
BACKGROUND
The goals of public accountability and quality improvement are compatible in theory but not necessarily in practice. Both concepts emphasize the customer. However, those working toward these two goals design systems with quite different roles and relationships between the providers and consumers of health care. Superficial interactions obstruct meaningful dialogue about how to build a better system meeting both sets of goals.


OBJECTIVE
Current practices of public accountability and quality improvement have fundamentally different paradigms concerning the roles and responsibilities of those who provide and those who consume health care.


CONCLUSIONS
There are at least three ways to improve the current relationship between public accountability and quality improvement. First, optimizing the design and performance of each effort would be an improvement since the goals are highly compatible. Neither ideal currently meets its own expectations, creating distrust among the proponents of each when reality falls short. Second, the two efforts could be coordinated through joint community-level planning and sharing. Finally and optimally, the two concepts could be made part of the same community-level cooperative system, an approach that offers the greatest opportunity for achieving shared goals.
Panzer
R J
RJ
Strong Memorial Hospital/University of Rochester Medical Center, New York 14642.
D018166:Health Care Reform / Q000592:standards; D006761:Hospitals / Q000592:standards*; D007400:Interprofessional Relations; D017146:Models, Organizational; D009518:New York; D011785:Quality Assurance, Health Care / Q000191:economics / Q000592:standards*; D012052:Reimbursement, Incentive; D012941:Social Responsibility; D014481:United States