Measuring and benchmarking performance in secondary care settings: the state of the art [Poster walk]

Background: Measuring performance in healthcare is an action that boosts quality and accountability. The interest in measurement and reporting frameworks has grown over the past two decades among researchers and policymakers. The identification and implementation of well-grounded performance indicators in secondary care settings are of special importance because of their potential value. This study aims to review and compare assessment systems used by national and international agencies to measure performance in secondary health care. Methods: Sets of indicators included in the review were developed by national and international agencies. Information on every tool was collected through research on Medline database and institutional websites from January 2018 to April 2018. The indicators were later aggregated by dimension (effectiveness, accessibility or safety) and medical specialty. Results: The search resulted in 555 indicators. The most commonly used dimension in performance frameworks was accessibility (455 indicators, 82.0%). About a sixth of the indicators (92, 15.7%) were included by more than one agency. Just 15 indicators (2.7%) took into account patient experience. Cardiology (80, 14,4%), surgery (307, 55.3%) and perinatal (39, 7.0%) were the most frequently reported medical specialties. Conclusions: These data give an international perspective to researchers, policymakers and citizens worldwide when approaching health performance frameworks and indicator sets. The described measuring frameworks outline different strategies for methodological problem solving and health policymaking. A great effort should be made by international governmental organizations to define a common and versatile set of indicators to ensure an evidence-based standardized performance monitoring, in particular in secondary care settings. Key messages: Performance measurement tools represent a key opportunity for healthcare quality improvement and policy-making in secondary care settings. The high heterogeneity between retrieved indicators indicate the need for a solid evidence base on which to design accurate, consistent and reproducible performance measurement tools.