Views
5 years ago

Ben RHM II - LZG.NRW

Ben RHM II - LZG.NRW

Benchmarking Regional Health Management II (Ben RHM II) ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Regarding the first approach to identify good practice models, only those data available on the regional level and which precisely satisfy the HPIs selected by the Steering Group (see chapter 8) were considered in the good practice analysis. Data available at the national level were not considered in the study. The rationale behind this is that, in accordance with the Steering Group, these are exactly the HPIs that have to be implemented in the regions to as- sess the performance of the health management and that helps policy makers to improve their health policies. On July 9 th and 10 th 2007, the Steering Group met at the Institute of Public Health NRW (lögd) to identify good practice models. For each project tracer, the Steering Group adopted the following procedure: in a first step, the regional data received from the participants on the health performance indicators selected by the Steering Group were reviewed to select a year in order to perform a more-in-detail analysis. The year was a recent year – as it is a criterion for good policy making and good health governance to draw on recent data – and chosen according to the availability of regional data. In a second step, once the year had been selected, the relevance of the indicators was re-examined to identify which of them should be further employed because they better reflect the disease burden and could be used by policy-makers in the formulation and evaluation of health programmes and interventions related to the disease and are thus of utmost importance as criteria for identifying good practices. In a third step, it was defined which optimal values the identified health performance indicators should have to achieve health and well-being among the population. For example, the optimal value for the “first-dose uptake” of immunisation against measles should be 95%, because, in accordance with the Field Guidelines for Measles Elimination from the World Health Organisation (2004), at least 95% of the population must be vaccinated to eliminate measles. In a fourth step, Ben RHM II regions with optimal or even better indicator values were identified for a final analysis. Using the second examination approach, in a fifth and last step, the information taken from the organigraphs, reference frameworks and in-depth interviews, from the identified regions with optimal values, will be examined and compared to recognise good practice. - 312 -

Benchmarking Regional Health Management II (Ben RHM II) ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 9.2 Measles 9.2.1 First approach: analysis of indicators a. Analysis of data availability When examining the information delivered by the regions with regard to the health perform- ance indicators defined by the Steering Group, it was confirmed that out of 19 participants three had not sent any kind of information on measles. Using the data received from the 16 remaining regions, a rapid review was performed to select the year for the good practice analysis. After confirming data availability for the majority of indicators for the year 2005, that year was chosen by the Steering Group as a basis for the measles analysis. Apart from this pragmatic selection criterion, it was important to use the most recent year since for communicable diseases rapid reporting to policy makers is of major importance. The availability of most recent data is thus essential for good practice in measles health management. Hence, using the year 2005 is also an implicit selection criterion for good practice. For the first and second dose of measles vaccination, the World Health Organisation (2007) recommends to provide every child with a first vaccination dose by his or her 12th month of age and to give all children between 9 months and 15 years of age a second opportunity. With regard to the information received, eight regions sent data for the year 2005 which satisfied the definition for the 1st dose indicator of the Steering Group covering the one-year-old population recommended by WHO for the fist dose (the information received from the regions with regard to the Health Performance Indicators is available in annex 5). Regarding the year 2005, one participant (England, UK) informed us that they did not have any available data on the first-dose indicator defined by the Steering Group. Western Greece (EL) supplied national information. - 313 -

  • 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 and 18:

    Benchmarking Regional Health Manage

  • Page 19 and 20:

    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: 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 ...
Pan Arab Journal of Oncology - Arab Medical Association Against ...
National Cancer Programme for Switzerland 2011–2015 - Oncosuisse
A Directory of Impact Assessment Guidelines - Iied - International ...
Redesigning the Health Care Team - National Diabetes Education ...
REDD+ in dryland forests - IIED - International Institute for ...
National Cancer Prevention Policy - Tobacco Control Supersite
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 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 ...
Barriers to mammography screenings in low-income women in the ...
Year 1 Budget Request - DHMH - Maryland.gov
Type II diabetes: Tips for managing your older ... - SugarNancy.com