| Objective: With the social progress and living improvement, people pay more attention to health,and more and more people consciously choose to go to hospital for treatment of high quality or health services. While, technique level, enviroment, concise quick treatment process and comprehensive service ability in hospital, have become the focus of social attention. How to evaluate the hospital comprehensive service ability has become a hot spot. At present, comprehensive service ability evaluation of hospital is obtained mostly through various scoring system. But that is not enough, such as lack of weight score. In order to strengthen the administration of medical institutions, promote the continuous improvement of medical quality, fulfill their social responsibilities and obligations, it is necessary carry out the research of evaluation system of hospital comprehensive service ability.Methods: This research takes the opportunity of hospital accreditation. The data was collected from evaluation for hospital management aspects from eleven experts in ten grade two comprehensive hospital comprehensive service ability information. The evaluation selected the rules from the national Ministry of health judgement rules promulgated in 2012-- 《 Two Level General Hospital Accreditation Standards Implementation Rules(2012)》(hereinafter referred to the rules). And in the rules, six indicators, including a hospital setting and function(A), hospital services(B), safety management of patients(C), medical quality and safety management and sustainable improvement(D), nursing management and quality(E), hospital management(F) were evaluated. The evaluation indexes are divided into four grades, each grade has clearly been defined in the "rules", according to experts. The "rules" of the six items of hospitals were scored by the experts. The value of the percentage of the original data from 10 samples of six indicators was calculated. Each index obeyed normal distribution. SPSS statistical analysis software was used for the Cluster analysis of ten samples, and 10 samples were divided into three types: G1, G2, G3。 And the correlation of each index and principal component clustering were also calculated. From the original data of X10×6 the characteristic correlation coefficient matrix R and R value could be obtained, and the variance percentage of total variance and the cumulative percentage of were calculated[1]. Taking the 3 principal factors accumulated variance contribution rate, the extracted 3 main factors can be obtained from the characteristic matrix of principal components. 3 main factors were independent of each other and could be used as the clustering index, and the 10 samples by principal component classification are divided into four categories: G1, G2, G3, G4.A significant test of all kinds, six indicators are subject to normal distribution. Single factor variance was used to analysis each index to test differences between different categories according to the original data of X10×6 calculated six index correlation coefficient matrix R and R values. Each factor variance percentage of total variance and cumulative percentage, the cumulative percentage of more than 85%, to calculate the orthogonal factor score of each sample were obtained by SPSS software, and the variance of each factor the contribution rate((percentage of variance of total variance) as the weight of each factor weighted summation were calculated through the comprehensive score of each sample y value.Results: Clustering analysis and component clustering used SPSS statistical analysis software for the ten samples, and 10 samples were classified into four categories: principal components G1,G2,G3,G4. The 2, 7, 8 the hospital comprehensive service ability is excellent, No. 4 and No. 5 comprehensive service ability is good, No 1, 3, 9 and No. 10 general, and No 6 comprehensive service ability is poor. Six indicators are subject to normal distribution, a significant test of all kinds, all kinds of differences were statistically significant(P<0.05). The variance contribution calculation of orthogonal factor score and the rate(percentage of variance of total variance) as the weight, integrated score obtained y value, y value is large sample the higher the score, the stronger the ability of comprehensive service.Conclusion: Using the results of multivariate statistical analysis is consistent with the objective classification of comprehensive service ability of the evaluation of the hospital, and the desired effect is achieved. Comparison of six index classification and principal component classification, the results are different. Because the main ingredient can avoid interference correlation, so its classification results couled be more credible. A value of six items of hospital management evaluation index by percentage form can avoid the influence of different dimensional index, so the result of evaluation is more objective. Here the y value obtained by considering the weights of comprehensive index of principal components are objective and reasonable. The 10 samples are divided into four categories, and the classification results are completely consistent with the principal component clustering, and furthermore, the feasibility of this method, based on principal component analysis method can be verified. Factor of ten hospitals are convincing. The analysis of variance test results show that the four kinds of classification in the six indicators of a significant difference verified the correctness of the principal component classification and table seven scores ranking result in hospital.This research adopted the method of multivariate statistical analysis and quantitative analysis of the hospital management level, and analyzed the problems and Research on multi index comprehensive evaluation from different sides, different angles. To avoid the interference of subjective factors made the evaluation results more objective, accurate. It could be a new attempt of hospital management level[2]-[3]. |
PDF Full Text Request