The development of a quality information system: a case study of Mexico

One of the primary obstacles in the implementation of continuous quality improvement (CQI) programmes in developing countries is the lack of timely and appropriate information for decentralized decision-making. The integrated quality information system (QIS) described herein demonstrates Mexico's unique effort to package four separate, yet mutually reinforcing, tools for the generation and use of quality-related information at all levels of the Mexican national health care system. The QIS is one element of the continuous quality improvement programme administered by the Secretariat of Health in Mexico. Mexico's QIS was designed to be flexible and capable of adapting to local needs, while at the same time allowing for the standardization of health care quality assurance indicators, and subsequent ability to measure and compare the quality performance of health facilities nationwide. The flexibility of the system extends to permit the optimal use of available data by health care managers at all levels of the health care system, as well as the generation of new information in important areas often neglected in more traditional information systems. Mexico's QIS consists of four integrated components: 1) a set of client and provider surveys, to assess specific issues in the quality of health services delivered; 2) client and provider national satisfaction surveys; 3) a sentinel health events strategy; and 4) a national Comparative Performance Evaluation System, for use by the Secretariate of Health for the quality assessment of state and provincial health care services (internal benchmarking). The QIS represents another step in Mexico's ongoing effort to use data for effective decision-making in the planning, monitoring and evaluation of services delivered by the national health care system. The design and application of Mexico's QIS provides a model for decentralized decision-making that could prove useful for developing countries, where the effective use of quality indicators is often limited. Further, the system could serve as a mechanism for motivating positive change in the way information is collected and used in the process of ensuring high quality health care service delivery.