Skip to main content

Table 5 Summary of physicians’ perceptions of national hospital quality measures for SSI, in terms of feasibility and need

From: National hospital quality measures for surgical site infections in South Korea: a survey among 20 expert physicians

Questions Feasibility Need
Conversion value Interpretation Conversion value Interpretation
Is increasing the percentage of indicators related to patient safety? 64.2 Moderate 2.13 Partially agree/Partially disagree
Is increasing the percentage of outcome indicators in the “Assessment of prophylactic use of antibiotics for surgery”? 59.6 Moderate 2.07 Partially agree/Partially disagree
Do you accept that the severity is adjusted among SSI indicators so as to increase the possibility of comparison? 56.6 Moderate 2.33 Partially agree/Partially disagree
Can SSI indicators be developed based on the SSI items used in existing assessment checklists? 56.6 Moderate 2.20 Partially agree/Partially disagree
Can a checklist be developed to help patients voluntarily report SSI after discharge? 56.6 Moderate 2.40 Partially agree/Partially disagree
Can SSI incidence data be obtained by linking with the KONIS SSI monitoring system? 61.1 Moderate 2.20 Partially agree/Partially disagree
Can the SSI readmission rate be accepted if the severity is adjusted to increase the possibility of comparison among hospitals? 71.7 High 1.93 Agree
Should SSI readmission rate be developed by excluding relatively mild SSI (outpatient treatment) and focusing on serious adverse events requiring hospitalization? 64.2 Moderate 1.93 Agree
Should SSI readmission rates be accurately surveyed to check only cases involving readmission to the same hospital? 61.0 Moderate 1.93 Agree
Are indicators such as SSI prevention education, operating room environment, surgery preparation process, and standard prevention guidelines, more useful? 65.7 Moderate 1.93 Agree
  1. Note. SSI Surgical Site Infection, KONIS Korea Nosocomial Infections Surveillance