Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

LIVE: Thursday 27th June 2024, 18:00-19:30 (CEST)
Join our expert panel to discover why you need to understand the drivers of non-adherence in your patients, and how you can optimize medication adherence in your clinics to drastically improve patient outcomes.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Critical Care
Published in: Critical Care 2/2006

01-04-2006 | Commentary

The value of monitoring outcomes should be measured by the appropriateness of the response

Author: Timothy P Hofer

Published in: Critical Care | Issue 2/2006

Login to get access

Abstract

Real-time monitoring of outcomes is becoming increasingly feasible in health care, and with it the hope of early detection of problems and the ability to tell whether interventions are having their desired effect. The next step should be to try to demonstrate that the reports of such monitoring systems lead to reasonable responses and valid inferences about causality, and that we are not chasing red herrings.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
Cockings JGL, Cook DA, Iqbal RK: Process monitoring in intensive care using cumulative expected minus observed mortality and risk-adjusted p charts. Crit Care 2006, 10: R28. 10.1186/cc3996PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMed
2.
Cook DA, Steiner SH, Cook RJ, Farewell VT, Morton AP: Monitoring the evolutionary process of quality: risk-adjusted charting to track outcomes in intensive care. Crit Care Med 2003, 31: 1676-1682. 10.1097/01.CCM.0000065273.63224.A8CrossRefPubMed
3.
Western Electric: Statistical Quality Control Handbook. New York, NY: Western Electric Company; 1958.
4.
Grigg OA, Farewell VT, Spiegelhalter DJ: Use of risk-adjusted CUSUM and RSPRT charts for monitoring in medical contexts. Stat Methods Med Res 2003, 12: 147-170.PubMed
5.
Guh RS: Integrating artificial intelligence into on-line statistical process control. Qual Reliabil Eng Int 2003, 19: 1-20. 10.1002/qre.510CrossRef
6.
Render ML, Kim HM, Deddens J, Sivaganesin S, Welsh DE, Bickel K, Freyberg R, Timmons S, Johnston J, Connors AF Jr, et al.: Variation in outcomes in Veterans Affairs intensive care units with a computerized severity measure. Crit Care Med 2005, 33: 930-939. 10.1097/01.CCM.0000162497.86229.E9CrossRefPubMed
Metadata
Title
The value of monitoring outcomes should be measured by the appropriateness of the response
Author
Timothy P Hofer
Publication date
01-04-2006
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
Critical Care / Issue 2/2006
Electronic ISSN: 1364-8535
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/cc4872

Other articles of this Issue 2/2006

Critical Care 2/2006 Go to the issue

Research

Decompressive laparotomy for abdominal compartment syndrome – a critical analysis

Commentary

New horizons: NT-proBNP for risk stratification of patients with shock in the intensive care unit

Commentary

Rescue therapy in septic shock – is terlipressin the last frontier?

Research

Early identification of intensive care unit-acquired infections with daily monitoring of C-reactive protein: a prospective observational study

Letter

Severe heat stroke with multiple organ dysfunction

Research

A3 adenosine receptors and mitogen-activated protein kinases in lung injury following in vivo reperfusion