RV: Quantifying quality

RV: Quantifying quality

Joaquin Oropeza M.

9/8/1999

----- Original Message -----
From: Joaquin Oropeza M. < <Email Address Redacted> >
To: < <Email Address Redacted> >; Ed Lemaire < <Email Address Redacted> >
Sent: Wednesday, September 08, 1999 12:48 AM
Subject: RE: Quantifying quality


> Dear Ed:
>
> I am very glad to know about you! How are things going up there?
>
> I has been making my self the same question for many years, as a fact, all
> that began with the questionnaire that Ricardo, Esthela, and I made for
the
> CAD/CAM project here in Mexico.
>
> The closer thing that I got to that idea of a quality standard, I guess
> that could be the develop of a measurable index like the APACHE index used
> in the intensive care units. It must be conciliated between patients and
all
> the group of people involved in the rehabilitation process of a person
with
> a disability.
>
> Facing this situation I think that a union of amputees can be a great step
> for been able to develop this index.
>
> Personally, I don't think that the simple fact to belong to an
organisation,
> does not may have the moral authority to decide who is a good
prosthetiest,
> or worst even who can work as a prosthetiest!
>
> It is recognised that this job began in an empirical way, as a fact many
of
> my teachers has been 100% empirical. Any way I guess that is the moment
to
> give the next step... but very hardly we will be able to give this next
step
> if the organisations involved in the field still fighting one against the
> other in stead of sit down in a table and define that index, with the
> respect that the other organisation deserves.
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Ed Lemaire < <Email Address Redacted> >
> To: < <Email Address Redacted> >
> Sent: Tuesday, September 07, 1999 8:33 AM
> Subject: Quantifying quality
>
>
> > Hello All,
> >
> > After reading the postings on Amputee Union I thought I'd ask for
> > opinions on assessing the quality of a prosthesis. It would be great if
> > we could verify who is talented by a quantifiable method that is
> > acceptable to all parties (clients, practitioners, educators,
researchers,
> > administrators, etc.). Unfortunately, measurement of quality has been a
> > problem - especially for a field where talent applies to numerous
areas
> > (technical, inter-personal, diagnostic , etc.).
> >
> > The most prevalent method for measuring quality is satisfaction
> > questionnaires (either client and peer). While this measure is useful
(if
> > the client is not happy then there is likely some problem), the quality
is
> > dependent on the client's previous experiences. As well, clinicians
with
> > exceptional inter-personal skills may have satisfied clients that use
> > appropriate, but not exceptional, prostheses. In fact, without
> qualtitative
> > measures of quality we can never be sure that a prosthesis is the best
> > that it can be.
> >
> > A big difference between the entire area of rehabilitation and other
> > medical areas is that we deal with cases where there is no obvious
> > outcome. We are not satisfied with someone just being able to walk, we
> > want them to have the highest functional level / with the most comfort /
> > and with the most security, that is possible. Identifying the highest
> > functional level is a common problem throughout the field of physical
> > rehabilitation.
> >
> > So, my question to the group is How would you propose to measure
> > quality in prosthetics?
> >
> > Edward Lemaire, PhD
> > Research Associate
> > The Rehabilitation Centre
> > (613) 737-7350 x5592
> >
> >