Views
5 years ago

Ben RHM II - LZG.NRW

Ben RHM II - LZG.NRW

Benchmarking Regional Health Management II (Ben RHM II) ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ “reference frameworks”, while Dublin/Mid-Leinster and Dublin/North-East (IE) had carried out only a few of them. Although there are limitations to the merely quantitative rapid appraisal method, the advantages of the method are clear. The method is relatively easy to use and, compared to the little effort, very beneficial and helpful. It can immediately be seen which areas policy makers should examine more closely to improve the health management in their region. Also regions can be compared against each other. However, a ranking of the regions is avoided by this method – which can be seen as an advantage. C.3 Health Performance Indicators There are five health performance indicators identified by the Ben RHM II Steering Group for measles, seven for breast cancer and four for diabetes. All refer to the regional level (cf. chap- ter 8). Measles: 1st Uptake dose (percentage); 2nd Uptake dose (percentage); Incidence (per 100.000); Mortality (per 100.000); Hospitalisation (percentage of cases) Breast cancer: Incidence (per 100.000 women); Mortality (per 100.000 women); Fatality (percentage of cases); 5-year survival rate (percentage of women diagnosed with breast cancer); 10-year survival rate (percentage of women diagnosed with breast cancer); Participation in mammography screening (percentage of women aged 50-69 years old); Detection (per 100.000 women screened) Diabetes (type II): Incidence (per 100.000); Prevalence (per 100.000); Participation in education programmes (percentage of diabetics); Hospitalisation (percentage of diabetics) The majority of the regions delivered information on the indicators. However, not all data received corresponded to the health performance indicators selected by the Steering Group. Major differences in the way regional information is calculated and reported were identified. The main differences and shortages of information are described in the following. - 18 -

Benchmarking Regional Health Management II (Ben RHM II) ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ C.4 Measles Based on the information received at the regional level, significant differences were confirmed regarding the way the first-dose information was handled and reported by the regions. Not all data corresponded to the first-dose indicator selected by the Steering Group. Not all first-dose data were calculated based on the population aged 12 months recommended by WHO for the first dose. With regard to the 2 nd dose uptake indicator, for the years 1999 to 2005 two regions did not provide any regional information concerning this indicator: Some provided national data instead of regional data, some did not provide any information at all. Important differences were also established concerning the calculation of this parameter. Not all data corresponded to the second-dose indicator selected by the Steering Group. None second-dose data were based on the population aged 9 months to 15 years old as recommended by WHO. C.5 Breast cancer No epidemiological information concerning breast cancer was received from four of the participating regions. Concerning breast cancer incidence, measured in new cases per 100.000 individuals, Sicily (IT) delivered national information. Western-Greece (EL) and Saxony- Anhalt (DE) informed the Ben RHM II secretariat that for the years 1999 to 2005 no such information was available at the regional level. Emilia-Romagna (IT) and England (UK) delivered sub-national data in which the regions are only partially considered. Concerning the 5-year survival rate (as percentage of women diagnosed with breast cancer), a significant shortage of information was confirmed. Only two regions from all participants, Sicily (IT) and Varna-Oblast (BG), delivered this precise information for all years from 1999 to 2005. With regard to the 10-year survival rate (as percentage of women diagnosed with breast cancer), a significant shortage of information was also confirmed. Six participants let the secretariat know that for the years 1999 to 2005 the indicator was not available at the regional level. Nine other regions did not deliver any kind of information on the 10-year survival rate. C.6 Diabetes (type II) Concerning the three project tracers, the greatest lack of regional data was identified for information related to diabetes (type II). Six participants did not deliver regional information - 19 -

  • Page 1 and 2: Benchmarking Regional Health Manage
  • Page 3 and 4: Benchmarking Regional Health Manage
  • Page 5 and 6: Benchmarking Regional Health Manage
  • Page 7 and 8: Benchmarking Regional Health Manage
  • Page 9 and 10: Benchmarking Regional Health Manage
  • Page 11 and 12: Benchmarking Regional Health Manage
  • Page 13 and 14: Benchmarking Regional Health Manage
  • Page 15 and 16: Benchmarking Regional Health Manage
  • Page 17: Benchmarking Regional Health Manage
  • Page 21 and 22: Benchmarking Regional Health Manage
  • Page 23 and 24: Benchmarking Regional Health Manage
  • Page 25 and 26: Benchmarking Regional Health Manage
  • Page 27 and 28: Benchmarking Regional Health Manage
  • Page 29 and 30: Benchmarking Regional Health Manage
  • Page 31 and 32: Benchmarking Regional Health Manage
  • Page 33 and 34: Benchmarking Regional Health Manage
  • Page 35 and 36: Benchmarking Regional Health Manage
  • Page 37 and 38: Benchmarking Regional Health Manage
  • Page 39 and 40: Benchmarking Regional Health Manage
  • Page 41 and 42: Benchmarking Regional Health Manage
  • Page 43 and 44: Benchmarking Regional Health Manage
  • Page 45 and 46: Benchmarking Regional Health Manage
  • Page 47 and 48: Benchmarking Regional Health Manage
  • Page 50 and 51: T i m e Benchmarking Regional Healt
  • Page 52 and 53: Benchmarking Regional Health Manage
  • Page 54: Benchmarking Regional Health Manage
  • Page 57 and 58: Benchmarking Regional Health Manage
  • Page 59 and 60: Benchmarking Regional Health Manage
  • Page 61 and 62: Benchmarking Regional Health Manage
  • Page 63 and 64: Benchmarking Regional Health Manage
  • Page 65 and 66: Benchmarking Regional Health Manage
  • Page 67 and 68: Benchmarking Regional Health Manage
  • Page 69 and 70:

    Benchmarking Regional Health Manage

  • Page 71 and 72:

    Benchmarking Regional Health Manage

  • Page 73 and 74:

    Benchmarking Regional Health Manage

  • Page 75 and 76:

    Benchmarking Regional Health Manage

  • Page 77 and 78:

    Benchmarking Regional Health Manage

  • Page 79 and 80:

    Benchmarking Regional Health Manage

  • Page 81 and 82:

    Benchmarking Regional Health Manage

  • Page 83 and 84:

    Benchmarking Regional Health Manage

  • Page 86 and 87:

    Benchmarking Regional Health Manage

  • Page 88 and 89:

    Benchmarking Regional Health Manage

  • Page 90 and 91:

    Benchmarking Regional Health Manage

  • Page 92 and 93:

    Benchmarking Regional Health Manage

  • Page 94 and 95:

    Benchmarking Regional Health Manage

  • Page 96 and 97:

    Benchmarking Regional Health Manage

  • Page 98 and 99:

    Benchmarking Regional Health Manage

  • Page 101 and 102:

    Benchmarking Regional Health Manage

  • Page 103 and 104:

    Benchmarking Regional Health Manage

  • Page 105 and 106:

    Benchmarking Regional Health Manage

  • Page 107 and 108:

    Benchmarking Regional Health Manage

  • Page 109 and 110:

    Benchmarking Regional Health Manage

  • Page 111 and 112:

    Benchmarking Regional Health Manage

  • Page 113 and 114:

    Benchmarking Regional Health Manage

  • Page 115 and 116:

    Benchmarking Regional Health Manage

  • Page 117 and 118:

    Benchmarking Regional Health Manage

  • Page 119 and 120:

    Benchmarking Regional Health Manage

  • Page 121 and 122:

    Benchmarking Regional Health Manage

  • Page 123 and 124:

    Benchmarking Regional Health Manage

  • Page 125 and 126:

    Benchmarking Regional Health Manage

  • Page 127 and 128:

    Benchmarking Regional Health Manage

  • Page 129 and 130:

    Benchmarking Regional Health Manage

  • Page 131 and 132:

    Benchmarking Regional Health Manage

  • Page 133 and 134:

    Benchmarking Regional Health Manage

  • Page 135 and 136:

    Benchmarking Regional Health Manage

  • Page 137 and 138:

    Benchmarking Regional Health Manage

  • Page 140 and 141:

    Benchmarking Regional Health Manage

  • Page 142 and 143:

    Benchmarking Regional Health Manage

  • Page 144 and 145:

    Benchmarking Regional Health Manage

  • Page 146 and 147:

    Benchmarking Regional Health Manage

  • Page 148 and 149:

    Benchmarking Regional Health Manage

  • Page 150 and 151:

    Benchmarking Regional Health Manage

  • Page 152 and 153:

    Benchmarking Regional Health Manage

  • Page 154 and 155:

    Benchmarking Regional Health Manage

  • Page 156 and 157:

    Benchmarking Regional Health Manage

  • Page 158 and 159:

    Benchmarking Regional Health Manage

  • Page 160 and 161:

    Benchmarking Regional Health Manage

  • Page 162 and 163:

    Benchmarking Regional Health Manage

  • Page 165 and 166:

    Benchmarking Regional Health Manage

  • Page 167 and 168:

    Benchmarking Regional Health Manage

  • Page 169 and 170:

    Benchmarking Regional Health Manage

  • Page 171 and 172:

    Benchmarking Regional Health Manage

  • Page 173 and 174:

    Benchmarking Regional Health Manage

  • Page 175:

    Benchmarking Regional Health Manage

  • Page 178 and 179:

    Benchmarking Regional Health Manage

  • Page 180 and 181:

    Benchmarking Regional Health Manage

  • Page 182 and 183:

    Benchmarking Regional Health Manage

  • Page 184 and 185:

    Benchmarking Regional Health Manage

  • Page 186 and 187:

    Benchmarking Regional Health Manage

  • Page 188 and 189:

    Benchmarking Regional Health Manage

  • Page 190 and 191:

    Benchmarking Regional Health Manage

  • Page 192 and 193:

    Benchmarking Regional Health Manage

  • Page 194 and 195:

    Benchmarking Regional Health Manage

  • Page 196 and 197:

    Benchmarking Regional Health Manage

  • Page 198 and 199:

    Benchmarking Regional Health Manage

  • Page 200 and 201:

    Benchmarking Regional Health Manage

  • Page 202 and 203:

    Benchmarking Regional Health Manage

  • Page 204 and 205:

    Benchmarking Regional Health Manage

  • Page 206 and 207:

    Benchmarking Regional Health Manage

  • Page 208 and 209:

    National Benchmarking Regional Heal

  • Page 210 and 211:

    Benchmarking Regional Health Manage

  • Page 212 and 213:

    Benchmarking Regional Health Manage

  • Page 214 and 215:

    Benchmarking Regional Health Manage

  • Page 216 and 217:

    Benchmarking Regional Health Manage

  • Page 218 and 219:

    Benchmarking Regional Health Manage

  • Page 220 and 221:

    Benchmarking Regional Health Manage

  • Page 222 and 223:

    Benchmarking Regional Health Manage

  • Page 224 and 225:

    Benchmarking Regional Health Manage

  • Page 226 and 227:

    Benchmarking Regional Health Manage

  • Page 228 and 229:

    Benchmarking Regional Health Manage

  • Page 230 and 231:

    Benchmarking Regional Health Manage

  • Page 232 and 233:

    Benchmarking Regional Health Manage

  • Page 234 and 235:

    Benchmarking Regional Health Manage

  • Page 236 and 237:

    Benchmarking Regional Health Manage

  • Page 238 and 239:

    Benchmarking Regional Health Manage

  • Page 240 and 241:

    Benchmarking Regional Health Manage

  • Page 242 and 243:

    Benchmarking Regional Health Manage

  • Page 244 and 245:

    Benchmarking Regional Health Manage

  • Page 246 and 247:

    Benchmarking Regional Health Manage

  • Page 248 and 249:

    Benchmarking Regional Health Manage

  • Page 250 and 251:

    Benchmarking Regional Health Manage

  • Page 252 and 253:

    Benchmarking Regional Health Manage

  • Page 254 and 255:

    Benchmarking Regional Health Manage

  • Page 256 and 257:

    Benchmarking Regional Health Manage

  • Page 258 and 259:

    Benchmarking Regional Health Manage

  • Page 260 and 261:

    Benchmarking Regional Health Manage

  • Page 262 and 263:

    Benchmarking Regional Health Manage

  • Page 264 and 265:

    Benchmarking Regional Health Manage

  • Page 266:

    Benchmarking Regional Health Manage

  • Page 269 and 270:

    Benchmarking Regional Health Manage

  • Page 271 and 272:

    Benchmarking Regional Health Manage

  • Page 273 and 274:

    Benchmarking Regional Health Manage

  • Page 275 and 276:

    Benchmarking Regional Health Manage

  • Page 277 and 278:

    Benchmarking Regional Health Manage

  • Page 279 and 280:

    Benchmarking Regional Health Manage

  • Page 281 and 282:

    Benchmarking Regional Health Manage

  • Page 283 and 284:

    Benchmarking Regional Health Manage

  • Page 285 and 286:

    Benchmarking Regional Health Manage

  • Page 287 and 288:

    Benchmarking Regional Health Manage

  • Page 289 and 290:

    Benchmarking Regional Health Manage

  • Page 291 and 292:

    Benchmarking Regional Health Manage

  • Page 293 and 294:

    Benchmarking Regional Health Manage

  • Page 295 and 296:

    Benchmarking Regional Health Manage

  • Page 297 and 298:

    Benchmarking Regional Health Manage

  • Page 299 and 300:

    Benchmarking Regional Health Manage

  • Page 301 and 302:

    Benchmarking Regional Health Manage

  • Page 303 and 304:

    Benchmarking Regional Health Manage

  • Page 305 and 306:

    Benchmarking Regional Health Manage

  • Page 307 and 308:

    Benchmarking Regional Health Manage

  • Page 309 and 310:

    Benchmarking Regional Health Manage

  • Page 311 and 312:

    Benchmarking Regional Health Manage

  • Page 313 and 314:

    Benchmarking Regional Health Manage

  • Page 315 and 316:

    Benchmarking Regional Health Manage

  • Page 317 and 318:

    Benchmarking Regional Health Manage

  • Page 319 and 320:

    Benchmarking Regional Health Manage

  • Page 321 and 322:

    Benchmarking Regional Health Manage

  • Page 323 and 324:

    Benchmarking Regional Health Manage

  • Page 325 and 326:

    Benchmarking Regional Health Manage

  • Page 327 and 328:

    Benchmarking Regional Health Manage

  • Page 329 and 330:

    Benchmarking Regional Health Manage

  • Page 332 and 333:

    T i m e Benchmarking Regional Healt

  • Page 334 and 335:

    Benchmarking Regional Health Manage

  • Page 336 and 337:

    Benchmarking Regional Health Manage

  • Page 339 and 340:

    Benchmarking Regional Health Manage

  • Page 341 and 342:

    Benchmarking Regional Health Manage

  • Page 344 and 345:

    Benchmarking Regional Health Manage

  • Page 346:

    Benchmarking Regional Health Manage

  • Page 349 and 350:

    Benchmarking Regional Health Manage

  • Page 353 and 354:

    Benchmarking Regional Health Manage

Barry Cash Ben Lomond Water.pdf
Bringing Medical Innovation from Bench To Bedside - Cleveland ...
National Cancer Prevention Policy - Tobacco Control Supersite
REDD+ in dryland forests - IIED - International Institute for ...
Pan Arab Journal of Oncology - Arab Medical Association Against ...
National Cancer Programme for Switzerland 2011–2015 - Oncosuisse
Handbook PO-505 - The ABC's of RMIS II Rail Management - APWU
II Review of JICA's cooperation on human resources in health sector
A Directory of Impact Assessment Guidelines - Iied - International ...
Redesigning the Health Care Team - National Diabetes Education ...
A Vision of a Cancer Network Five Years On4:layout 1
Roadmap to prevent and combat drug-resistant tuberculosis
Report of the Meeting of EPI Managers of South-East Asia Region
results from the Nurses' Health Study II - Breast Cancer Research
AWARE II End of Project Report - Management Sciences for Health
Annual Meeting Proceedings II - Newly Released Abstracts for
Elevated free IGF-II levels in localized, early-stage breast cancer in ...
Analogs of GnRH-I and GnRH-II inhibit - European Journal of ...
sti screening guidelines - Region II STD/HIV Prevention Training ...
Clinical Practice Guidelines - National Health and Medical Research ...
Year 1 Budget Request - DHMH - Maryland.gov
Barriers to mammography screenings in low-income women in the ...
Multidisciplinary Care and Managed Clinical ... - Cancer Australia
Linkage - DCEG - Home - National Cancer Institute