The paper “ Quality Standards in the National Service Framework” is a forceful example of the literature review on nursing. The most simple definition of quality is a 'degree of excellence; general excellence'. However, such a general statement is of little use in assessing health or social care, where the specific dimensions of quality need to be considered. Readers of the North American literature may find that quality is limited to the scientific-technical ability of health staff and the humanity with which care is delivered (Black, 2000). Although both of these are important, such a definition could lead to superbly technical and human services, which were also ineffective, inequitable, and inefficient.
A better and broader definition states that the quality of health care should include: Effectiveness (achieving the intended benefits in the population, under usual conditions of care); Acceptability and humanity (to the consumer and the provider); Equity and accessibility (the provision and availability of services to everyone likely to benefit); andEfficiency (greatest benefit for the least cost). (Shaw, 1999; Black, 2000)Within acceptability and humanity, many professionals would also include mechanisms to empower patients and their families--so that they may in-crease control over the services received.
Each patient should also be offered appropriate care, i.e. the selection, from the body of available interventions that have been shown to be efficacious for an illness, of the intervention that is most likely to produce the outcomes desired by that individual patient (Working Group of the NHS Management Executive, 2004). AIM OF THE PAPERThe aim of this paper is to assess that whether national service frameworks and quality standards are necessary for improving services, and is there evidence that they are working.
Moreover for this purpose I have used the healthcare sector as a case example as I believe that it is the most critical service framework that is of prime importance to the common man.