Criterion 5.1.2 QUALITY INDICATORS

 Criterion 5.1.2

The Head of the Community Health Center and the team or officers who are responsible for improving quality and patient safety are committed to cultivating a culture of continuous quality improvement through managing quality indicators.

1) Main Thoughts:

a) The Head of the Community Health Center is responsible for setting priorities for programs that need to be improved, taking into account processes that have high risk implications, involve a large population (high volume), require large costs if not managed well (high cost), achievement low performance (bad performance), or tends to cause problems (problem prone).

b) The success of quality improvement can be measured through measuring quality indicators.

c) Puskesmas measures quality indicators consisting of:

(1) National Quality Indicator (INM)

This indicator is an indicator that must be measured and reported by all Community Health Centers.

(2) Community Health Center Priority Quality Indicators (IMPP)

This indicator is formulated based on priority health problems in the Puskesmas work area whose improvement efforts must be supported by KMP, UKM and UKP, laboratory and pharmacy.

Example:

The problem at the Puskesmas level which is determined in accordance with health problems in the work area is the high prevalence of tuberculosis, so efforts are made to improve UKP activities related to the provision of clinical services to overcome the problem of tuberculosis, efforts are made to improve the performance of UKM services to reduce the prevalence of tuberculosis, and management support is needed to overcome the problem of tuberculosis.

(3) Service Priority Quality Indicator (IMPEL) This indicator is formulated based on priority health problems in each service unit.

d) Puskesmas improves knowledge and skills through training, workshops, comparative studies, on-the-job training or in-house training regarding quality improvement programs.

e) Quality indicators that have been achieved during the current year can be replaced with new quality indicators. Quality indicators that have not reached the target can remain a priority for the following year.

2) Assessment Elements:

a) There is a policy regarding Puskesmas quality indicators which is equipped with an indicator profile (R).

b) Quality indicators are measured according to the indicator profile (D, W).

c) Evaluation of efforts to improve the quality of the Community Health Center is carried out based on follow-up to the improvement plan (D, W).