Refine
Has Fulltext
- yes (2)
Document Type
- Postprint (2) (remove)
Language
- English (2)
Is part of the Bibliography
- yes (2)
Keywords
- quality management (2) (remove)
Strength of weakness
(2020)
The paper investigates quality management in teaching and learning in higher education institutions from a principal-agent perspective. Based on data gained from semi-structured interviews and from a nation-wide survey with quality managers of German higher education institutions, the study shows how quality managers position themselves in relation to their perception of the interests of other actors in higher education institutions. The paper describes the various interests and discusses the main implications of this constellation of actors. It argues that quality managers, although they may be considered as rather weak actors within the higher education institution, may be characterised as having a strength of weakness due to diverging interests of their principals.
Background
Outcome quality management requires the consecutive registration of defined variables. The aim was to identify relevant parameters in order to objectively assess the in-patient rehabilitation outcome.
Methods
From February 2009 to June 2010 1253 patients (70.9 ± 7.0 years, 78.1% men) at 12 rehabilitation clinics were enrolled. Items concerning sociodemographic data, the impairment group (surgery, conservative/interventional treatment), cardiovascular risk factors, structural and functional parameters and subjective health were tested in respect of their measurability, sensitivity to change and their propensity to be influenced by rehabilitation.
Results
The majority of patients (61.1%) were referred for rehabilitation after cardiac surgery, 38.9% after conservative or interventional treatment for an acute coronary syndrome. Functionally relevant comorbidities were seen in 49.2% (diabetes mellitus, stroke, peripheral artery disease, chronic obstructive lung disease). In three key areas 13 parameters were identified as being sensitive to change and subject to modification by rehabilitation: cardiovascular risk factors (blood pressure, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, triglycerides), exercise capacity (resting heart rate, maximal exercise capacity, maximal walking distance, heart failure, angina pectoris) and subjective health (IRES-24 (indicators of rehabilitation status): pain, somatic health, psychological well-being and depression as well as anxiety on the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale).
Conclusion
The outcome of in-patient rehabilitation in elderly patients can be comprehensively assessed by the identification of appropriate key areas, that is, cardiovascular risk factors, exercise capacity and subjective health. This may well serve as a benchmark for internal and external quality management.