NHS PROMs Programme | Swedish Quality Registries: SHPR and SKAR |
---|---|
Governance | |
+ Investment and commitment of government, including funding to get programme started + Clear ownership of programme by NHS England + Standardized data collection protocols | + SHPR: partly government funded which makes it possible to employ people to sustain, improve, and further develop the registry |
- Reforms within the NHS put responsibility for programme at question for some time which, in turn, weakened the programme - Lack of ownership by clinicians and risk that data is ignored by them given their limited involvement in setting up and running the programme | - SHPR: government funding does not cover research activities |
○ Limitations of PROMs data in the context of registries need to be taken serious since the data provides foundation for health policy changes ○ Data governance: question whether data is individual or societal good needs to be clarified ➔ transparency on individual’s right to privacy versus the society’s mandate to provide high quality health care | |
Capacity building | |
+ Resources, incl. Government funding, are in place to build up the capacity to collect, analyse, disseminate and implement findings | |
- Stakeholders, in particular economists and staffing of hospital boards lack training in quality measurement and management - Dominance of financial matters over quality in hospitals - Skills and knowledge of an expert in quality management does not fit into a defined role within the NHS |