Chinese General Practice ›› 2026, Vol. 29 ›› Issue (28): 4107-4116.DOI: 10.12114/j.issn.1007-9572.2025.0480

• General Practice/Community Health Servic·Focus on Hierarchical Diagnosis and Treatment • Previous Articles     Next Articles

Practical Research on Promoting Hierarchical Diagnosis and Treatment Through Collaborative Governance of Medical Quality in Regional Medical Alliance

  

  1. 1. School of Public Health, Peking University, Beijing 100191, China
    2. PKU China Center for Health Development Studies, Beijing 100191, China
  • Received:2026-01-26 Revised:2026-07-19 Published:2026-10-05 Online:2026-09-02
  • Contact: LIU Xiaoyu

分级诊疗背景下区域化医联体医疗质量协同治理的实践研究

  

  1. 1.100191 北京市,北京大学公共卫生学院
    2.100191 北京市,北京大学中国卫生发展研究中心
  • 通讯作者: 刘晓云
  • 作者简介:

    作者贡献:

    李志新负责研究的设计与实施、数据的统计分析,撰写论文;刘晓云负责研究的理论指导,实施过程的把控、论文的审阅与修改,对文章整体负责。

Abstract:

Background

The construction of medical alliance is an important and practical path to achieve hierarchical diagnosis and treatment. Collaborative governance of medical quality management in medical alliance has always been the goal pursued by health management departments at all levels and medical professional quality control institutions.

Objective

This study constructed a collaborative governance system for medical quality management within regional medical consortiums, and verified its governance effects.

Methods

A collaborative governance system for medical quality management in regional medical consortiums was established under the framework of synergy theory. Fengtai District of Beijing was selected as the case area, where collaborative governance was rolled out across 340 medical and health institutions under its jurisdiction. A questionnaire on cognition of medical quality management was developed. Stratified cluster sampling was adopted to recruit 7 653 medical staff from medical consortiums, who participated in a baseline survey (Q4 2023) and a post-intervention follow-up survey (Q4 2024) to analyze changes in their cognition of medical quality management. In addition, policy-led and market-led medical consortiums were compared to explore the correlation between governance effects and consortium types.

Results

The implementation framework for collaborative medical quality governance of regional medical consortiums includes: integrating administrative departments, quality control centers, leading hospitals of medical consortiums and regional medical institutions to form a multi-stakeholder governance body; establishing communication, coordination and resource-information integration mechanisms among all stakeholders; and operating a collaborative working model featuring tiered liaison, tiered quality control, information sharing, and monitoring & evaluation. One year after the launch of collaborative governance, the correct response rates of medical staff regarding knowledge of nosocomial infection control, nursing management, medical administration and pharmaceutical quality management were all significantly higher than baseline levels (P<0.05). Comparative analysis of different consortium types showed that after intervention, medical staff in policy-led consortiums achieved significantly higher correct rates in 68 questionnaire items (P<0.05), while those in market-led consortiums saw statistically significant improvements in 76 questionnaire items (P<0.05). Before collaborative governance, significant inter-group differences in correct rates existed for 67 items between the two types of consortiums (P<0.05), and disparities remained significant for 36 items after implementation (P<0.05).

Conclusion

Mutual promotion and graduated quality control were effective approaches to gradually promote the quality homogenization management of all medical institutions within a jurisdiction, with satisfactory outcomes achieved in both types of medical consortiums. These strategies could provide practical guidance for health management departments to promote the collaborative governance and management homogenization of regional medical quality.

Key words: Hierarchical diagnosis and treatment, Medical alliance, Medical quality, Ccollaborative governance

摘要:

背景

医联体建设是实现分级诊疗的重要现实路径。医联体内医疗质量协同治理,是各级卫生行政部门和质控机构的共同建设目标。

目的

构建区域化医联体内医疗质量管理的协同治理体系,并验证其协同治理效果。

方法

基于协同理论构建区域化医联体内医疗质量管理的协同治理体系,以北京市丰台区为案例地区,对其辖区内340家医疗机构实施协同治理。编制"医疗质量管理认知调查问卷",对采用分层整体抽样抽取的医联体医务人员(n=7 653)进行基线调查(2023年第4季度)和终点结果调查(2024年第4季度),以分析其医疗质量管理认知水平变化。另选取政策主导型医联体和市场主导型医联体进行对比,以分析协同治理效果与医联体类型的关系。

结果

区域化医联体医疗质量协同治理的实施方案包括:整合管理部门、质控中心、医联体牵头单位及区域医疗机构形成多元主体,建立主体间沟通协调与资源信息整合机制,实施"分级联络、分级质控、信息共享、监测评价"的协同运行机制。评估结果显示,经过1年的协同治理实践,医联体医务人员的院感、护理、医政、药学质量管理相关知识回答正确率均较基线升高(P<0.05)。对不同形式医联体的对比分析发现:协同治理实施后,政策主导型医联体有64道题目的正确率高于实施前(P<0.05),市场主导型医联体有76道题目的正确率高于实施前(P<0.05);协同治理实施前,政策主导型与市场主导型医联体有67道题的正确率比较,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05);协同治理实施后,两类医联体仅有36道题的正确率比较,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。

结论

本研究通过相互促进和分级质控的方式逐步推动辖区所有医疗机构质量管理的协同治理,不同类型医联体均取得较好效果,为卫生管理部门推动区域化医疗质量的协同治理与管理同质化提供了实践指导。

关键词: 分级诊疗, 医联体, 医疗质量, 协同治理