Medical business work value evaluation method and system based on key steps

Abstract

The invention relates to the technical field of medical work evaluation systems, in particular to a medical business work value evaluation method and system based on key steps. The evaluation method comprises the following steps: dividing an operation process into a plurality of service modules, wherein the plurality of service modules comprise an outpatient service module, a hospitalization service module and an operation service module; the plurality of service modules are decomposed into a plurality of key steps, and the key steps of the outpatient service module comprise project initiation, diagnosis evaluation and treatment execution; the hospitalization service module comprises hospitalization evaluation, hospitalization treatment, medical record recording and discharge follow-up visit; and the operation business module comprises preoperative preparation, operation implementation and postoperative care. According to the method, the participation roles and the contribution degrees thereof are considered for weight distribution, the workload of less calculation and missing calculation for part of workers participating in labor is avoided, and the working enthusiasm of medical staff is stimulated.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] The present invention relates to the technical field of medical work evaluation systems, and in particular to a medical business work value evaluation method and system based on key steps. Background Art

[0003] The RBRVS evaluation system originated in the 1980s. It is based on project cost accounting. It removes the public investment of hospitals, equipment, and medicines and consumables in the project, and the remaining part reflects the operation of medical staff and reflects the medical value. This is an evaluation method based on resource consumption and relative value to pay for physician labor costs, so it has certain limitations:

[0004] 1. The RBRVS system is based on indiscriminate accounting of charging items and assesses the medical value of charging items. However, multiple roles are involved in the actual operation of charging items. The actual number of charging items reflects the workload of medical staff actually involved in the work, and cannot directly reflect the quality of work.

[0005] 2. The existing performance evaluation system is only based on charging items. Performance evaluation, as the "baton" of hospital management, evaluates workload based on the number of charging items, which can easily lead clinical medical staff to have the unhealthy tendency of "overcharging and overcharging", and in severe cases, lead to over-medicalization.

[0006] 3. The RBRVS system only considers charging items. However, in the actual work process of medical staff, the workload cannot be assessed solely by charging items, such as the outpatient doctor's diagnosis and execution workload, the preoperative and postoperative preparation workload, the hospitalized patient management, medical record writing, and discharge follow-up workload. Summary of the invention

[0007] The present invention provides a medical service work value evaluation method and system based on key steps to solve the technical problem that the existing medical work evaluation method is not perfect.

[0008] The technical solution of the present invention to solve the above technical problems is as follows:

[0009] On the one hand, a method for evaluating the value of medical business work based on key steps is provided, and the steps of the evaluation method include:

[0010] Divide the operation process into multiple business modules, including outpatient business module, inpatient business module and surgical business module;

[0011] The multiple business modules are broken down into multiple key steps. The key steps of the outpatient business module include project initiation, diagnostic evaluation and treatment execution; the inpatient business module includes admission evaluation, inpatient treatment, medical record recording and discharge follow-up; the surgical business module includes preoperative preparation, surgical implementation and postoperative care;

[0012] Set a corresponding role for each key step, and set a contribution weight for each role. The contribution weight is dynamically adjusted according to the actual participation of the role in the process;

[0013] A performance evaluation model is constructed based on fuzzy evaluation method and hierarchical analysis method, and the work contribution value of each role in each key step is calculated by the following formula:

[0014] Among them, V i,j represents the contribution value of the i-th role in the j-th key step, W k is the contribution weight, P i,j,k represents the actual performance of the role in this step, Q k is the adjustment coefficient based on fuzzy evaluation.

[0015] Furthermore, the steps of the evaluation method also include:

[0016] Adjust the contribution weight allocation mechanism based on the bottleneck links and role performance in the actual business process;

[0017] Generate hierarchical reports based on performance results and provide feedback on process bottlenecks in key steps to optimize evaluation results.

[0018] Furthermore, the dynamic adjustment mechanism automatically adjusts based on historical performance data, identifies bottlenecks in different medical business modules, determines which roles play a decisive role in the bottlenecks, and modifies the contribution weights accordingly;

[0019] The identification of bottleneck links is based on K-means cluster analysis of historical data, combined with the scoring results of fuzzy comprehensive evaluation, and the weight adjustment formula constructed using historical data is:

[0020] W i,j '=W i,j ×(1+γ·R i,j ), where W i,j ′ is the modified weight, γ is the weight adjustment coefficient, R i,j The historical performance of the role in the bottleneck link.

[0021] Furthermore, the evaluation method also includes performance reward calculation for the workload exceeding the standard in the medical process, which is calculated as follows:

[0022] Gm=Bm+λ·(Nm-Tm), where Gm is the incentive value of the character, Bm is the basic incentive value, and N m is the actual amount of work completed, T m is the set basic workload, and λ is the incentive coefficient.

[0023] Furthermore, the evaluation method supports independent evaluation of different business modules, and performs differentiated processing according to the different complexity and execution difficulty of each key step in any business module. The weight setting of different modules is achieved by adjusting the fuzzy evaluation coefficient in the performance calculation. The weight setting is based on the following formula:

[0024] Where Q i,j,k is the fuzzy adjustment coefficient of the kth indicator of the i-th role in the j-th step, T j is the total workload of the key steps, P i,j,p The character's performance in each step.

[0025] Furthermore, the evaluation method also includes long-term performance tracking of the participation of roles in different business modules and analysis of the trend of contribution value changes based on historical data. The analysis is achieved through the following formula:

[0026] Among them, V i,j represents the final contribution value of the i-th role in the j-th key step, V i,j,0 is the basic contribution value, ΔV i,j,t is the contribution change value in the tth evaluation, and T is the evaluation period.

[0027] Furthermore, the performance results are used to formulate a differentiated incentive mechanism for dynamic allocation based on actual contribution. The incentive mechanism calculates the final incentive value for each role through the following formula:

[0028] Gi=Bi+α·(Vi-V0), where Gi is the total incentive value of the i-th character, Bi is the basic incentive, and V i is the final contribution value of the character, V0 is the set contribution benchmark value, and α is the incentive coefficient.

[0029] Furthermore, the method supports the output of multi-dimensional performance indicators and generates a comprehensive evaluation report based on multiple dimensions such as workload, work quality, business complexity, and historical performance. The report calculates the comprehensive performance value using the following formula:

[0030] Among them, S i is the comprehensive performance value of the i-th role, W k is the weight of each dimension, P i,kis the performance of the character in the kth dimension, ζ is the weighting coefficient, G i,k Modifies the character's historical performance in this dimension.

[0031] Furthermore, the evaluation method introduces a process improvement feedback mechanism into the performance evaluation model. The process improvement feedback mechanism provides improvement suggestions based on the bottleneck analysis of each key step and makes adaptive adjustments in subsequent evaluation cycles. The steps of the process improvement feedback mechanism include:

[0032] Identify abnormal key steps that affect work efficiency through historical data analysis;

[0033] Special weight adjustment is made for the roles involved in unusually critical steps;

[0034] The performance of participating roles is recalculated during the next evaluation cycle and used to drive process improvements.

[0035] On the other hand, a medical service work value evaluation system based on key steps is provided, and the evaluation system includes:

[0036] Business module division module, used to divide the medical business process into multiple business modules and set the key steps of each business module;

[0037] Role weight setting module, used to set the role and contribution weight of each key step;

[0038] Performance calculation module, used to calculate the work contribution value of each role in each key step;

[0039] Performance optimization module, which optimizes the performance results of each role based on fuzzy evaluation method and K-means clustering algorithm;

[0040] The performance report generation module is used to generate performance evaluation reports for each role and output the final work value evaluation results.

[0041] The beneficial effects of the present invention are:

[0042] 1. The present invention considers the participating roles and their contribution to perform weight distribution, avoids under-calculation or omission of workload for some employees who participate in the labor, truly realizes "labor pays off", and stimulates the enthusiasm of medical staff. Figure 3 , Figure 8 , Fig.11 , Fig.14 In the hospital's key outpatient charges, inpatient charges, outpatient services, inpatient services, surgery and other businesses, multiple participating roles can be added to each business process and weights can be assigned.

[0043] For example, the existing technology can only count the workload of the "tumor cell chemotherapy drug sensitivity test" project for the doctor who issues the order and the executing department. If the project requires the cooperation of the pathology department and the ward department in the actual operation, the workload cannot be calculated for the two departments under the existing technology's statistical workload caliber. However, the evaluation method of the present invention can add two participating roles to the executing department, and configure the weights according to the actual workload ratio, and then calculate the workload.

[0044] 2. The evaluation system of the present invention supports multi-caliber custom algorithms, as above Fig.11 , Fig.14 The evaluation system of the present invention supports multi-caliber customized performance distribution calculation methods for inpatient services and surgical services. Compared with the performance appraisal methods with a single caliber and fixed algorithms in the prior art, the evaluation system of the present invention is more adaptable to the complex workflows and higher accounting requirements of large hospitals.

[0045] 3. In addition to charging items, key business points of hospital operations should be considered for assessment. For example, outpatient consultation, inpatient ward management, surgery, etc. Compared with existing technologies, only considering charging items may lead to excessive medical treatment such as "overcharging". Considering performance from more key operational processes will invisibly motivate medical staff and urge hospitals to guide them in the positive direction of receiving more high-quality patients, seeing more outpatients, and performing more high-quality surgeries.

[0046] 4. The evaluation system of the present invention adopts a method of defining a basic workload for outpatient services and providing incentives for those who exceed the workload, such as Figure 4 . The prior art generally adopts a smooth incentive scheme, such as: if an outpatient doctor has 60 outpatient visits a day, 2 yuan per visit is used as a performance incentive, and the performance is 60*2=120 yuan. The evaluation system of the present invention sets a basic outpatient volume. Assuming that the basic outpatient volume is set to 25 visits, 1 yuan per visit is used as an incentive for visits under 25 visits, and 3 yuan per visit is used for visits beyond 25 visits. Then, the doctor's performance under the KSVA evaluation system is 1*25+(60-25)*3=130 yuan. BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

[0047] Figure 1 In one embodiment of the present invention;

[0048] Figure 2 Point value configuration for outpatient billing service / inpatient billing service in one embodiment of the present invention Figure 1 ;

[0049] Figure 3 Point value configuration for outpatient billing service / inpatient billing service in one embodiment of the present invention Figure 2 ;

[0050] Figure 4Adding a department diagram to the basic dictionary for outpatient service configuration in one embodiment of the present invention;

[0051] Figure 5 It is a diagram of outpatient volume based on the scheduling basis for outpatient services in one embodiment of the present invention;

[0052] Figure 6 The basic coefficient for outpatient service configuration in one embodiment of the present invention Figure 1 ;

[0053] Figure 7 The basic coefficient for outpatient service configuration in one embodiment of the present invention Figure 2 ;

[0054] Figure 8 A weight distribution diagram of outpatient services according to workload contribution in one embodiment of the present invention;

[0055] Fig. 9 Configure the basic coefficient for hospitalization service in one embodiment of the present invention Figure 1 ;

[0056] Fig.10 Configure the basic coefficient for hospitalization service in one embodiment of the present invention Figure 2 ;

[0057] Fig.11 Add a role performance allocation algorithm diagram for the inpatient service in one embodiment of the present invention;

[0058] Fig.12 The basic coefficient for configuring the surgical service in one embodiment of the present invention is Figure 1 ;

[0059] Fig.13 The basic coefficient for configuring the surgical service in one embodiment of the present invention is Figure 2 ;

[0060] Fig.14 This is a surgical service algorithm calculation diagram in one embodiment of the present invention. DETAILED DESCRIPTION

[0061] In order to facilitate understanding of the embodiments of the present application, first, some terms involved in the present application are explained.

[0062] KSVA (Key Step Value Assess): Key step value assessment system.

[0063] The present invention provides the following preferred embodiments:

[0064] Embodiment 1

[0065] In order to solve the problems of inaccurate evaluation, difficulty in quantification and lack of dynamic adjustment mechanism in the value evaluation of medical business work, this embodiment proposes a medical business work value evaluation method based on key steps. This method realizes scientific and complete evaluation of various business links of medical institutions through systematic process division and refined contribution calculation.

[0066] like Figure 1 As shown, the steps of the evaluation method include:

[0067] S101. Divide the operation process into multiple business modules, including an outpatient business module, an inpatient business module and a surgical business module.

[0068] S102. Decompose multiple business modules into multiple key steps. The key steps of the outpatient business module include project initiation, diagnostic evaluation and treatment execution; the inpatient business module includes admission evaluation, inpatient treatment, medical record recording and discharge follow-up; the surgical business module includes preoperative preparation, surgical implementation and postoperative care.

[0069] S103. Set a corresponding role for each key step, including but not limited to doctors, nurses, medical technicians, administrative staff, etc., and set a contribution weight for each role. The contribution weight is dynamically adjusted according to the actual degree of participation of the role in the process.

[0070] S104. Construct a performance evaluation model based on fuzzy evaluation method and hierarchical analysis method to calculate the work contribution value of each role in each key step.

[0071] In the specific implementation, from the perspective of hospital operation, the overall operation of the hospital can be divided into five business modules: outpatient fee business, inpatient fee business, outpatient business, inpatient business, and surgical business. Then the business process of each business module is evaluated according to its key steps. The key steps of outpatient fee business and inpatient fee business are divided into: project initiation and project execution; the key steps of outpatient business are divided into business initiation and outpatient diagnosis; the key steps of inpatient business are divided into: business initiation, inpatient admission, ward management, medical record writing, and discharge follow-up; the key steps of surgical business are divided into: surgery initiation, surgical operation, and postoperative operation.

[0072] Furthermore, when conducting value assessment on key steps, it is mainly based on theories such as hierarchical analysis method, expert scoring method and fuzzy evaluation method. Since the value assessment of each business module has certain uncertainties, such as the setting of project point values ​​needs to consider the specific operators of different hospitals, it is necessary to be able to make fine adjustments according to the actual situation when designing point values. The fuzzy evaluation method can consider different factors and conduct quantitative analysis on qualitative indicators. It has certain improvements and adjustability. It can also be combined with a variety of evaluation methods, and the evaluation process is more flexible and scientific. Before conducting fuzzy evaluation, first refer to the hierarchical analysis method to determine the weight values ​​of indicators such as each charging item, each key step, and each participating role, and then use the matrix algorithm to perform fuzzy mathematical evaluation of the indicators. After that, the fuzzy evaluation model is adjusted in combination with the K-means clustering algorithm and expert evaluation to complete the revision of the KSVA evaluation system.

[0073] Furthermore, the KSVA evaluation system supports adding multiple participating roles based on a single charging item or item classification, and setting different performance appraisal allocation weights according to the contribution of different participating roles to the work, which effectively solves the problem that the existing technology cannot consider the workload of multiple parties and cannot allocate it. The following is the specific implementation method for outpatient charging business / inpatient charging business.

[0074] Step 1: Configure point values

[0075] Connect all charging items of the hospital's His system, and set point values ​​for all charging items that require doctors, medical technicians, and nurses to participate in diagnosis or operation. From project initiation to project execution, the participants include the initiating doctor, the executing doctor, the executing medical technician, and the executing nurse. According to the actual business process of the charging items, the outpatient and inpatient point values ​​of the project are configured separately.

[0076] Step 2: Configure KSVA

[0077] According to the specific charging items or project classifications, add participating roles from the initiation and operation levels, and set the weight of each participating role according to the actual operation contribution. Outpatient and inpatient settings are separated, with more customized calibers, and support for the configuration of various special situations. For example, for the "Tumor Cell Chemotherapy Drug Sensitivity Test" project, the outpatient initiator: the workload of the doctor who issues the order accounts for 100%, the outpatient operator: the workload of the medical technology execution accounts for 100%, the inpatient initiator: the workload of the department where the bed doctor is located accounts for 100%, and the inpatient operator: the workload of the medical technology execution department and the ward nursing unit accounts for 4:1.

[0078] Step 3: System Calculation

[0079] After the above configuration is completed, the system will automatically calculate the point value according to the caliber set above.

[0080] The algorithm is as follows: KSVA point value of outpatient billing business / inpatient billing business = sum (point value of each caliber * KSVA participating role weight)

[0081] Example reference Figure 2 and Figure 3 The final results of the "Tumor Cell Chemotherapy Drug Sensitivity Test" project are as follows:

[0082] Outpatient initiation: the doctor who issues the order = 48*1 = 48 points;

[0083] Outpatient execution: Execution department = 240*1 = 240 points;

[0084] Hospitalization initiated: the department where the bed doctor is located = 48*1 = 48 points;

[0085] Inpatient execution: Execution of medical and technical departments = 240*0.8 = 192 points;

[0086] Hospitalization execution: ward nursing unit = 240*0.2 = 48 minutes;

[0087] Furthermore, based on the workload of outpatient doctors, the outpatient service distinguishes between weekdays and holidays, and subdivides the registration into ordinary, deputy director, director, and expert. According to the business process, the workload of outpatient service is divided into two key steps: business initiation and outpatient diagnosis. KSVA evaluation configuration is performed through the participation sequence and participation role. The following is the specific implementation method of outpatient service.

[0088] Step 1: Configure the basic dictionary

[0089] Whether excess workload assessment is needed based on actual performance assessment, if necessary, Figure 4 Add departments and configure the monthly basic outpatient volume of departments or doctors or the basic outpatient volume of departments on weekdays and holidays, or Figure 5 Supports setting the basic outpatient volume for each department per shift based on the outpatient scheduling. If you do not conduct excess workload assessment, ignore this step 1.

[0090] Step 2: Configure the base coefficients

[0091] like Figure 6 , Figure 7 , taking into account factors such as working hours, work difficulty, and efficiency, the basic coefficients for the initiation and diagnosis of ordinary numbers, deputy director numbers, director numbers, and expert numbers are configured according to working days and holidays.

[0092] Step 3: Perform KSVA configuration

[0093] like Figure 8According to the outpatient business process, from the two key steps of initiation and outpatient diagnosis, consider whether to provide incentives for excess workload, increase the number of participating roles and distribute weights based on workload contribution. The basic workload statistics methods include daily outpatient volume, monthly outpatient volume, and scheduled outpatient volume.

[0094] Step 4: System Calculation

[0095] After the above configuration is completed, the system automatically calculates the final result according to the above settings.

[0096] The algorithm is as follows:

[0097] If no excess is set: medical fee*coefficient*weight

[0098] When setting the excess amount: medical fee * coefficient * weight (basic part) + medical fee * coefficient * excess weight (excess part)

[0099] Furthermore, based on the entire business process from admission to discharge, the inpatient service workload is divided into six key steps: business initiation, admission, ward management, medical record writing, discharge follow-up, and quality setting. Each step of the work is refined, and KSVA configuration is performed separately in places involving doctors and nurses. Finally, the system calculates the workload distribution results. The following is a specific implementation method for the inpatient service.

[0100] Step 1: Basic Configuration

[0101] like Fig. 9 , Fig.10 , and configure basic coefficients for the medical workload involved in each step of hospitalization.

[0102] Step 2: KSVA configuration and calculation

[0103] like Fig.11 , respectively, from the business initiation, hospital admission, ward management, medical record writing, discharge follow-up and other processes, add participating positions and participating roles, and add performance allocation custom algorithms for participating roles. Then the system calculates according to the custom algorithm.

[0104] Furthermore, the workload of surgical services is assessed based on five levels: surgical level, surgical initiation, surgical operation, postoperative operation, and quality setting. The following are the specific implementation steps for surgical services.

[0105] Step 1: Basic Configuration

[0106] like Fig.12 , Fig.13 , and configure five coefficients for level one to level four surgeries, namely surgical level, surgical initiation, surgical operation, postoperative operation, and quality setting.

[0107] Step 2: KSVA configuration and calculation

[0108] According to the business processes of surgeries at various levels, multiple participating roles are added to the three processes of surgery initiation, surgical operation, and postoperative operation. The calculation method is customized according to the actual situation, and the system performs calculations based on personal customized algorithms.

[0109] It can be understood that the KSVA evaluation system breaks through the previous evaluation concept of solely calculating performance based on charging items. It evaluates the value of key steps in the hospital's main business processes, and evaluates the workload of medical staff in a more fair, comprehensive and objective manner. Compared with the existing methods, this embodiment can not only better reflect the labor value of medical staff and stimulate their work enthusiasm, but also effectively avoid the occurrence of "over-medicalization" caused by the assessment of the number of charging items.

[0110] It should be noted that this embodiment consists of five aspects: outpatient charging business, inpatient charging business, outpatient business, inpatient business, and surgical business. However, it is also possible to allocate KSVA weights by considering the participating roles in a single item. Therefore, a single item about KSVA is an alternative solution.

[0111] Furthermore, the outpatient clinic distinguishes between ordinary numbers, deputy director numbers, director numbers, and expert numbers; and distinguishes between weekdays, holidays, etc. Without making such distinction, it can also be achieved by simply designing the basic workload and then implementing an excess reward plan. Therefore, excess rewards based on the basic workload are an alternative plan.

[0112] Furthermore, the inpatient part is divided into five services: service initiation, inpatient admission, ward management, medical record writing, and discharge follow-up. Program management can be achieved by missing some items or adding some items, so it can also be used as an alternative solution.

[0113] Furthermore, surgery is divided into five items: surgical level, surgical initiation, surgical operation, postoperative operation, and quality setting. Missing some items or adding some items can also achieve program management, or increasing or reducing the participating roles can also be used as an alternative plan.

[0114] Through the method of this embodiment, medical institutions can scientifically and systematically evaluate the work value of each business module, each key step, and each participating role. This evaluation method can not only improve the management efficiency of medical institutions, but also provide strong support for human resource allocation and performance incentives, thereby promoting the overall improvement of medical service quality.

[0115] Embodiment 2

[0116] In order to solve the problems of inflexible evaluation results, difficulty in coping with changes in actual business, and lack of feedback optimization mechanism in the evaluation of medical business work value, this embodiment further optimizes the medical business work value evaluation method based on key steps. This method realizes real-time optimization and continuous improvement of evaluation results by introducing dynamic adjustment mechanism and feedback optimization process.

[0117] Specifically, in the evaluation process, this embodiment combines the bottleneck links and role performance in the actual business process, and adjusts the contribution weight allocation mechanism to ensure the fairness and scientificity of the evaluation results. It should be understood that this dynamic adjustment mechanism can promptly reflect changes in business processes and differences in role performance. For example, when a bottleneck occurs in a key step, the system will automatically identify the link and adjust the contribution weights of the roles involved in the link accordingly. This adjustment may include increasing the weight of roles that perform outstandingly in solving bottleneck problems, or reducing the weight of roles that cause bottlenecks.

[0118] Furthermore, this embodiment introduces a weight adjustment algorithm based on historical data. The algorithm calculates a dynamic adjustment coefficient by analyzing the performance of each role in different key steps over a period of time. This adjustment coefficient will be multiplied by the original contribution weight to obtain a new weight value. It can be understood that this method not only takes into account the current business situation, but also incorporates the factors of historical performance, making the evaluation results more comprehensive and objective.

[0119] This embodiment also introduces a multi-dimensional role performance evaluation mechanism. This mechanism not only considers the efficiency of the role in completing tasks, but also includes multiple dimensions such as work quality, innovation ability, and teamwork. Each dimension has a corresponding scoring standard and weight, and the overall performance score of the role is finally calculated comprehensively. This multi-dimensional evaluation can more comprehensively reflect the actual contribution of each role in the medical business.

[0120] On the other hand, this embodiment introduces a hierarchical reporting mechanism for performance results and a process bottleneck feedback mechanism. The hierarchical reporting mechanism presents performance results according to multiple levels such as organizational structure, business module, and key steps, allowing managers to analyze and understand the evaluation results from different perspectives. The process bottleneck feedback mechanism identifies the bottleneck links that affect overall efficiency by analyzing the execution of each key step, and provides corresponding improvement suggestions.

[0121] It is important to understand that this feedback mechanism does not simply point out problems, but also provides specific improvement plans based on historical data and best practices. For example, for frequently occurring bottlenecks, the system will analyze the causes of the bottlenecks, such as insufficient staffing, inefficient equipment, or unreasonable process design, and make corresponding improvement suggestions based on the analysis results.

[0122] Embodiment 3

[0123] In order to solve the problems of insufficient dynamic adjustment and inaccurate identification of bottleneck links in the process of medical business work value evaluation, this embodiment further optimizes a dynamic adjustment mechanism for automatic adjustment based on historical performance data. This mechanism identifies the bottleneck links in different medical business modules, determines the main influencing factors, and corrects the contribution weights based on historical data, thereby improving the accuracy and flexibility of the evaluation.

[0124] Specifically, this embodiment uses K-means cluster analysis to identify bottleneck links in historical data. K-means cluster analysis is an unsupervised machine learning method that can effectively discover natural groupings in data. By clustering historical data, it is possible to identify which key steps frequently have bottlenecks and determine which roles play a decisive role in these bottleneck links. The results of the cluster analysis will directly affect the subsequent contribution weight adjustment.

[0125] It should be understood that the bottleneck link identification in this embodiment not only relies on cluster analysis, but also combines the scoring results of fuzzy comprehensive evaluation. The fuzzy comprehensive evaluation method can handle complex, multi-dimensional uncertainty data, and further improve the accuracy of bottleneck identification by fuzzy scoring of the execution of key steps. For example, for a key step, the system will comprehensively consider multiple factors such as workload, work quality and task difficulty, and score through fuzzy logic to identify the real bottleneck link.

[0126] Furthermore, this embodiment realizes automatic dynamic adjustment by constructing a weight adjustment formula based on historical data. The formula is as follows:

[0127] W i,j '=W i,j ×(1+γ·R i,j )

[0128] Among them, W i,j ′ is the modified weight, γ is the weight adjustment coefficient, R i,j is the historical performance of the role in the bottleneck link. It can be understood that the formula comprehensively considers the historical performance of the role in the bottleneck link, and modifies the weight by adjusting the coefficient γ, making the weight distribution more scientific and reasonable.

[0129] The benefit of this embodiment is that, by introducing an automated dynamic adjustment mechanism, it can respond to changes in the actual business process in real time, thereby improving the flexibility and adaptability of the evaluation system. Specifically, when the system identifies a bottleneck in a key step and a role performs outstandingly in it, the contribution weight of the role will be automatically adjusted and increased to more accurately reflect its actual contribution. Similarly, for roles that perform poorly in the bottleneck link, their weights will be reduced accordingly to ensure the fairness of the evaluation.

[0130] In order to further verify the effectiveness of this embodiment, the system regularly reviews the evaluation results, and evaluates the actual impact of the weight adjustment by comparing the performance data before and after the adjustment. It should be understood that this review mechanism can help discover and correct possible problems in the evaluation process and continuously optimize the evaluation model. Through this embodiment, the medical business work value evaluation method not only solves the problems of dynamic adjustment and bottleneck identification, but also realizes the continuous optimization of the evaluation system through scientific weight adjustment and review mechanisms. Ultimately, it can provide medical institutions with more accurate and objective work value evaluations and provide solid data support for management decisions.

[0131] Embodiment 4

[0132] In order to solve the problem that the workload of medical business work exceeds the standard and fails to receive reasonable incentives during the actual execution process, this embodiment further optimizes the medical business work value evaluation method based on key steps, and calculates performance rewards for excess workload to ensure that medical staff can still receive fair and reasonable incentives when overloaded, thereby improving their work enthusiasm and performance.

[0133] Specifically, this embodiment adds a performance reward calculation for over-standard workload based on the original key steps and role contribution evaluation. It should be understood that the reward calculation is not a simple linear superposition, but takes into account multiple factors such as the basic incentive value, the actual workload completed, the set basic workload, and the incentive coefficient, striving to make the incentive measures more scientific and reasonable.

[0134] Furthermore, the performance reward calculation formula in this embodiment is as follows:

[0135] Gm=Bm+λ·(Nm-Tm)

[0136] Among them, G m is the incentive value of the character, B m is the basic incentive value, N m is the actual amount of work completed, T mis the set basic workload, and λ is the incentive coefficient. Through this formula, the additional incentives that a role receives for exceeding the workload can be quantified. This calculation method not only ensures the fairness of the basic incentives, but also encourages the role to continue to invest more energy in overwork after completing the basic tasks through additional performance rewards.

[0137] The benefit of this embodiment is that by introducing the incentive coefficient λ, the benefits of the role under high load are increased, and the intensity of the incentive is controlled to avoid waste of resources or unfair competition caused by excessive incentives. For example, a reasonable incentive coefficient λ is set to ensure that the role obtains corresponding incentives while completing excess work tasks, and the fairness of the overall performance evaluation will not be affected by too little excess workload.

[0138] It should be understood that the basic incentive value B m The setting of basic incentives is based on multiple factors such as the role's rank, responsibilities, and historical performance. The system will analyze historical data to determine a reasonable basic incentive standard. For example, for senior doctors, their basic incentive value may be higher than that of new doctors, while the basic incentive value of front-line nurses needs to take into account factors such as their work intensity and complexity.

[0139] Furthermore, this embodiment also introduces a dynamic adjustment mechanism to adjust the incentive coefficient λ and the basic workload T in real time according to the actual workload and performance results. m This dynamic adjustment can not only cope with the changes in work in different time periods and different business modules, but also continuously optimize the incentive strategy based on historical data. For example, by analyzing the workload over a period of time, the system can automatically adjust the basic workload and incentive coefficient to ensure the continued effectiveness of the incentive strategy.

[0140] Embodiment 5

[0141] In order to solve the impact of the complexity and execution difficulty of each key step in different medical business modules on the overall performance evaluation, this embodiment further optimizes the medical business work value evaluation method, supports independent evaluation of different business modules, and performs differentiated processing according to the complexity and execution difficulty of the key steps in each module. By adjusting the fuzzy evaluation coefficient in the performance calculation, the weight setting of each module is achieved, making the performance evaluation more accurate and fair.

[0142] Specifically, this embodiment introduces fuzzy adjustment coefficients to handle the differentiation of key steps in different business modules. It should be understood that the workload, execution difficulty and specific contribution of each module in the medical business process are different, so a simple unified standard cannot fully reflect the actual situation. Through the fuzzy adjustment coefficient, the steps in different modules can be processed in a refined manner to improve the flexibility and accuracy of the evaluation.

[0143] Furthermore, the weight setting formula of this embodiment is as follows:

[0144]

[0145] Where Q i,j,k is the fuzzy adjustment coefficient of the kth indicator of the i-th role in the j-th step, T j is the total workload of the key steps, P i,j,p It is the performance of the role in each step. It can be understood that this formula combines the total workload of the step and the performance score of the role, and reasonably allocates the fuzzy adjustment coefficient, so that the performance evaluation not only takes into account the difference in workload, but also incorporates the difficulty and complexity factors in actual execution.

[0146] The benefit of this embodiment is that, through differentiated processing and fuzzy adjustment, the problem of unfair evaluation caused by different work content and complexity among business modules is solved. For example, in some highly complex business modules, such as surgical operations or emergency treatment, the performance weight of the role will be appropriately increased to reflect its contribution in a high-risk, high-intensity work environment. For some relatively simple processes, such as routine inspections or follow-up work, the system will adjust the fuzzy coefficient to reduce the weight of the step in the overall performance evaluation, thereby achieving reasonable resource allocation.

[0147] It should be understood that the fuzzy evaluation coefficient in this embodiment is not only adjusted by formula, but also combined with historical data and real-time feedback mechanism. The system will regularly analyze the execution of key steps in each business module, and dynamically adjust the fuzzy coefficient in combination with performance data over the past period of time to ensure that the evaluation results of each module can be updated as the actual business changes. For example, if the execution difficulty or workload of a module increases significantly within a certain period of time, the system will automatically increase the fuzzy adjustment coefficient of the module to ensure that the contribution of the role can be fully reflected.

[0148] Furthermore, this embodiment introduces a multi-dimensional fuzzy evaluation mechanism to comprehensively evaluate the key steps in each business module. The evaluation not only includes workload and efficiency, but also covers multiple dimensions such as task complexity, team collaboration, and innovation ability. The system performs a fuzzy comprehensive evaluation on these dimensions, and finally generates a comprehensive performance score, and calculates the fuzzy adjustment coefficient according to the formula to ensure the accuracy and fairness of the evaluation.

[0149] Through this embodiment, the performance evaluation method of medical services can more comprehensively and objectively reflect the actual working conditions in different modules, and through reasonable weight setting and fuzzy adjustment mechanism, ensure that the evaluation results can accurately reflect the contribution of each role in different modules.

[0150] Embodiment 6

[0151] In order to solve the problem of performance tracking and contribution value change analysis of the long-term participation of different roles in various business modules in the medical business, this embodiment further optimizes the medical business work value evaluation method based on key steps, and accurately reflects the long-term performance of the role and the dynamic change trend of its contribution value through continuous tracking and analysis of historical data.

[0152] Specifically, this embodiment introduces a long-term performance tracking mechanism for roles in various business modules to achieve scientific quantification and analysis of changes in role contribution values. It should be understood that performance in medical services is not the result of a single event, but the cumulative contribution of roles in business processes that have participated in multiple times over a long period of time. Therefore, by tracking and analyzing the results of multiple performance evaluations of roles, it is possible to more accurately measure the role's continuous contribution value and its performance changes in various key steps.

[0153] Furthermore, this embodiment uses the following formula to dynamically analyze the contribution value of the role in different key steps:

[0154]

[0155] Among them, V i,j represents the final contribution value of the i-th role in the j-th key step, V i,j,0 is the basic contribution value, ΔV i,j,t is the contribution change value in the tth evaluation, and T is the evaluation period. It can be understood that this formula accumulates multiple evaluation results to obtain the final contribution value of the role in the entire evaluation period, thereby being able to fully reflect the long-term performance of the role.

[0156] The benefit of this embodiment is that by continuously tracking and accumulating the contribution value of each role in each key step, the performance trend of the role in the entire business cycle can be clearly displayed. For example, for a role, its contribution value is low in the early stage, but as its skills and experience grow, its contribution value gradually increases. At this time, the system can accurately reflect this positive change trend in the final contribution value of the role through continuous cumulative evaluation.

[0157] It is important to understand that the basic contribution value V i,j,0 The setting of contribution change ΔV is usually based on the initial qualifications of the role, historical performance record, and the role positioning in the medical team. Over time, the system continuously updates and adjusts the contribution change value ΔV by analyzing the performance data of multiple evaluation cycles. i,j,t, to ensure the dynamic and accurate evaluation. For example, if a role performs significantly better than expected over a period of time, its contribution change value will show a positive growth trend, otherwise it may be negative, thus ensuring the fairness and scientificity of long-term evaluation.

[0158] Furthermore, this embodiment also introduces a trend analysis module in performance tracking, which predicts the future performance of the role by mining and analyzing the trend of contribution value changes. This module combines historical data and analyzes the contribution changes in different evaluation cycles to identify the performance patterns and potential development trends of the role under specific working conditions. For example, if a role shows a trend of continuously increasing contribution in a specific key step, the system can predict its future performance in similar steps based on this trend, thereby providing medical managers with a more valuable reference for decision-making.

[0159] Through this embodiment, medical institutions can achieve long-term performance tracking of the role participation in different business modules, which not only fully reflects the long-term contribution value of the role, but also optimizes performance management and resource allocation decisions in a data-driven way. Ultimately, this embodiment helps to improve the overall quality of medical services and ensure fairness within the team and the rationality of the incentive mechanism.

[0160] Embodiment 7

[0161] In order to solve the problem of performance differences among different roles in medical services at key steps and their impact on the incentive mechanism, this embodiment further optimizes the medical service work value evaluation method based on key steps. By combining performance results with differentiated incentive mechanisms, dynamic allocation is performed based on the actual contributions of roles to ensure the fairness and rationality of the incentive plan.

[0162] Specifically, this embodiment uses a differentiated incentive mechanism to dynamically adjust the incentive value of each role by quantitatively analyzing the final performance results of the roles. It should be understood that the complexity of medical services makes different roles contribute differently in various business modules, so the traditional average incentive distribution method cannot truly reflect the actual contribution of individuals. In order to solve this problem, this embodiment introduces a dynamically adjusted incentive coefficient by setting basic incentives and contribution benchmark values, thereby achieving differentiated incentive distribution for the contributions of different roles.

[0163] Furthermore, the incentive mechanism of this embodiment is calculated using the following formula:

[0164] Gi=Bi+α·(Vi-V0)

[0165] Among them, G i is the total incentive value of the i-th character, B i As the basic incentive, V iis the final contribution value of the character, V0 is the set contribution benchmark value, and α is the incentive coefficient. It can be understood that this formula adjusts the basic incentive of the character by contribution, so that those characters whose final contribution value is higher than the benchmark value can get additional incentives, while those characters whose final contribution value is lower than the benchmark value can only get basic incentives, thus reflecting the performance difference in incentive distribution.

[0166] The benefit of this embodiment is that through this differentiated incentive mechanism, the contribution of each role in the medical business process can be more accurately reflected. Specifically, for those roles that perform well in key steps and whose final contribution value is significantly higher than the benchmark value, they can get more incentives, thereby improving the enthusiasm of individuals and teams. On the contrary, for those roles with low contributions or poor performance, the incentive value will be reduced according to their actual contribution, thereby prompting them to improve their performance in subsequent work.

[0167] It should be understood that the basic incentive value B i The setting of is usually based on factors such as the role's position, scope of responsibilities, and seniority in the medical institution, while the contribution benchmark value V0 is set based on historical performance data and industry standards to ensure relative fairness of different roles at the starting point. The incentive coefficient α is dynamically adjusted based on the actual situation of different medical business modules to reflect the complexity of work and performance difficulty within each module. For example, for high-intensity and high-complexity business modules such as emergency and surgery, the incentive coefficient is usually higher to reflect the importance and risk of these tasks to medical services.

[0168] Furthermore, this embodiment also introduces a dynamic incentive adjustment mechanism. The system will regularly adjust the incentive coefficient α and the contribution benchmark value V0 according to the long-term performance of the role and the actual needs of the medical business to ensure that the incentive mechanism can adapt to changes in the medical business. For example, if the focus of the work of a medical institution at a certain stage shifts to certain specific business modules, such as infectious disease prevention and control during the epidemic, the system will dynamically increase the incentive coefficients in these modules to motivate the enthusiasm and contribution performance of relevant personnel.

[0169] Through this embodiment, medical institutions can formulate a scientific and dynamic incentive allocation mechanism based on the actual contribution of roles in each key step, and ultimately ensure that performance evaluation matches the incentive plan, thereby improving the overall work efficiency and service quality of the team.

[0170] Embodiment 8

[0171] In order to solve the performance evaluation problem of multiple dimensions in medical services, this embodiment further optimizes the medical service work value evaluation method based on key steps. By introducing a comprehensive analysis mechanism of multi-dimensional performance indicators, it supports a comprehensive evaluation of the performance of roles in multiple aspects such as workload, work quality, business complexity and historical performance, and then generates an authoritative comprehensive evaluation report.

[0172] Specifically, this embodiment uses a weighted formula to calculate the comprehensive performance value of each role by performing quantitative analysis on each dimension. It should be understood that the weights between different dimensions are set according to the actual needs of medical services and specific job responsibilities. For example, for some complex business modules, business complexity may occupy a larger weight, while in other modules, work quality may be given a higher priority. Therefore, this embodiment flexibly adjusts the weight values ​​of each dimension so that the comprehensive evaluation can accurately reflect the multi-dimensional performance of each role.

[0173] Furthermore, the comprehensive performance value Si of the role is calculated by the following formula:

[0174]

[0175] Among them, S i is the comprehensive performance value of the i-th role, W k is the weight of each dimension, P i,k is the performance of the character in the kth dimension, ζ is the weighting coefficient, G i,k is the historical performance correction value of the character in that dimension. It can be understood that this formula not only takes into account the current performance of the character in each dimension, but also the historical performance correction value G i,k Adjustments are made to the role's historical performance to ensure that the overall evaluation reflects the role's long-term contributions and development trends.

[0176] The benefit of this embodiment is that through this multi-dimensional comprehensive evaluation method, the overall performance of the role in the medical business can be evaluated more comprehensively and scientifically. For example, for a certain role, although its workload is large, its business complexity and work quality are maintained at a high level. Therefore, through weighted calculation of different dimensions, a comprehensive performance value that is more in line with the actual situation can be obtained, avoiding the deviation that may be caused by single-dimensional evaluation.

[0177] It is important to understand that the weights of each dimension W kThe setting is usually based on the overall performance management goals of the medical institution and the specific needs of the business module. For example, in a business module with medical quality as the core, the weight value of work quality will be higher, while in a module that emphasizes efficiency, the weight of workload may be more prominent. By dynamically adjusting the weights of each dimension, this embodiment ensures that the comprehensive performance evaluation report can adapt to the changes and development needs of medical business in real time.

[0178] Furthermore, the introduction of the weighting coefficient ζ enables the character's historical performance to occupy an appropriate proportion in the comprehensive performance value. It can be understood that the historical performance correction value G i,k It can help measure the performance of roles in past evaluation cycles, especially for roles with long-term stable performance, whose historical performance will have a positive impact on the comprehensive performance value. For roles that perform poorly at certain stages, their historical correction value will have a certain negative impact on their current comprehensive evaluation, thereby prompting them to improve their performance in subsequent work.

[0179] Through this embodiment, medical institutions can generate a multi-dimensional comprehensive performance report to provide a more comprehensive decision-making basis for the long-term performance management of roles. Ultimately, this evaluation method can not only objectively reflect the actual performance of roles in different dimensions, but also promote the continuous improvement of work quality and efficiency of roles through multi-dimensional weight adjustment and historical performance correction.

[0180] Embodiment 9

[0181] In order to solve the efficiency bottleneck problem in key steps of the medical business process, this embodiment further refines the medical business work value evaluation method based on key steps, introduces a process improvement feedback mechanism, and realizes continuous optimization of key steps. The process improvement feedback mechanism identifies abnormal key steps that affect work efficiency through historical data analysis, and makes adaptive adjustments in subsequent evaluation cycles to promote process improvement and performance improvement.

[0182] Specifically, this embodiment builds a data analysis module based on each key step of medical business to collect and analyze historical performance data in each step. It should be understood that different roles often have different work performance in each key step, and some abnormal steps may become bottlenecks that limit the efficiency of the entire business process due to business complexity, poor role collaboration, or insufficient resource allocation. By conducting a detailed analysis of these bottlenecks, the system can automatically identify abnormal key steps and make specific process improvement suggestions based on abnormal trends in historical data.

[0183] Furthermore, in order to more accurately reflect the contribution and influence of each role in the abnormal key steps, this embodiment makes special weight adjustments for the roles involved in these abnormal steps. On the basis of the standard performance model, the system will give higher weights to the roles involved in the abnormal steps to amplify their impact on the overall performance. This weight adjustment not only takes into account the performance data in the current cycle, but also makes corrections through trend changes in historical data to ensure the fairness of the evaluation results. It can be understood that the core of this adjustment mechanism is to motivate those roles that perform outstandingly in bottleneck links, prompting them to continue to optimize their performance in subsequent work, while also proposing improvement requirements for low-performing roles.

[0184] The benefit of this embodiment is that by recalculating the performance of roles involved in abnormal key steps in the next evaluation cycle, the entire process can be dynamically adjusted and optimized. It should be understood that traditional performance evaluation methods are often difficult to reflect actual problems in the process in a timely manner, and the feedback mechanism of this embodiment can effectively solve this problem through real-time data analysis and weight adjustment, ensuring the efficient operation of each link in the process. At the same time, the recalculated performance value can not only be used for current incentive allocation, but also provides a scientific basis for role development planning in subsequent cycles.

[0185] Furthermore, this embodiment also introduces an adaptive adjustment mechanism. Through the continuous accumulation and analysis of historical data, the system can automatically identify the changing trends within multiple evaluation cycles, so as to continuously optimize the weight adjustment rules in subsequent evaluations. For example, when a key step continues to show a high abnormality rate for multiple cycles, the system can automatically increase the weight of the step to further refine the evaluation of the role performance in the step. Correspondingly, when a role continues to perform outstandingly in a bottleneck link for multiple cycles, its performance weight will gradually decrease to prevent weight imbalance from affecting the overall evaluation.

[0186] Through this embodiment, medical institutions can achieve continuous improvement and optimization of business processes, which can not only improve overall work efficiency, but also promote the active participation and performance improvement of roles in each key step. In addition, the adaptive feedback mechanism of this embodiment can ensure the scientificity and effectiveness of process improvement suggestions, providing strong support for subsequent business optimization.

[0187] Embodiment 10

[0188] In order to solve the problems of accuracy and objectivity in the evaluation of the work contribution of each role in the medical business process, this embodiment further optimizes the medical business work value evaluation system based on key steps. Through modular design, it ensures that the system can effectively divide business processes, accurately evaluate role contributions, and provide scientific performance optimization suggestions.

[0189] Specifically, this embodiment first divides the medical business process into modules by business modules, and divides the entire medical business into multiple independent business modules. It should be understood that each business module usually contains several key steps, and the key steps of different business modules are determined according to the complexity and importance of the actual operation. For example, in the surgical business module, steps such as surgical preparation, operating procedure, and postoperative recovery management can all be regarded as key steps, while in the patient management module, initial diagnosis, follow-up, and case records constitute key steps. By refining the setting of these key steps, the system can provide a clear process basis for subsequent performance evaluation.

[0190] Furthermore, this embodiment determines the roles and their contribution weights in each key step through a role weight setting module. It should be understood that the weight of a role is not only related to its actual participation in the step, but also takes into account the distribution of responsibilities of the role in the entire business process. For example, in the surgical process, the weight of the surgeon is usually higher, while the weights of the anesthesiologist and the surgical nurse are reasonably set according to the complexity and risk of their respective tasks. This module can flexibly adjust the contribution weights of the roles based on historical data analysis and the actual needs of medical institutions to ensure the rationality and accuracy of performance evaluation.

[0191] This embodiment also includes a performance calculation module for quantifying the work contribution of each role in each key step. It can be understood that the performance calculation is based on multiple dimensions such as the actual workload, work quality, and business complexity of the role, and is adjusted in combination with its historical performance. Through this module, the system can generate accurate role performance data and provide a basis for subsequent performance optimization.

[0192] Furthermore, in order to improve the scientific nature of performance evaluation, this embodiment introduces a performance optimization module, which combines the fuzzy evaluation method and the K-means clustering algorithm to optimize the performance results of each role. The fuzzy evaluation method can make a more comprehensive analysis of the performance of the role in key steps through a comprehensive evaluation of multiple uncertain factors. For example, in complex business modules, since the risks and challenges in the steps are not easy to quantify, the fuzzy evaluation method can better handle these uncertain factors. The K-means clustering algorithm is used to divide the performance results of each role into several categories to facilitate the discovery of groups of roles with similar performance. Through this optimization method, this embodiment can provide medical institutions with more objective performance analysis and help managers more clearly identify the relative performance of roles.

[0193] Furthermore, the performance report generation module of this embodiment generates a performance evaluation report for each role based on the aforementioned performance calculation and optimization results. It should be understood that the performance report not only shows the performance of each role in different key steps, but also presents the comprehensive performance of the role in multiple dimensions in a visual way. At the same time, the performance report also contains suggestions for the future development of the role, helping managers make more forward-looking personnel management and resource allocation decisions.

[0194] Through this embodiment, medical institutions can achieve comprehensive evaluation and management optimization of the work value of each role. This system can not only accurately divide business modules and key steps, but also improve the objectivity and applicability of performance evaluation through scientific performance calculation and optimization methods. In addition, the final performance report provides managers with a basis for decision-making and promotes the continuous optimization and improvement of medical business processes.

Claims

1. A method for evaluating the value of medical business work based on key steps, characterized in that: The steps of the evaluation method include: Dividing the operation process into multiple business modules, the multiple business modules include an outpatient business module, an inpatient business module and a surgical business module; The multiple business modules are decomposed into multiple key steps. The key steps of the outpatient business module include project initiation, diagnosis and evaluation, and treatment execution; the inpatient business module includes admission assessment, inpatient treatment, medical record recording, and discharge follow-up; the surgical business module includes preoperative preparation, surgical implementation, and postoperative care; A corresponding role is set for each of the key steps, and a contribution weight is set for each of the roles, and the contribution weight is dynamically adjusted according to the actual degree of participation of the role in the process; A performance evaluation model is constructed based on fuzzy evaluation method and hierarchical analysis method, and the work contribution value of each role in each key step is calculated by the following formula: Among them, V i,j represents the contribution value of the i-th role in the j-th key step, W k is the contribution weight, P i,j,k represents the actual performance of the role in this step, Q k is the adjustment coefficient based on fuzzy evaluation.

2. The method for evaluating the value of medical service work based on key steps as claimed in claim 1, characterized in that: The steps of the evaluation method also include: Adjust the contribution weight allocation mechanism based on the bottleneck links in the actual business process and the performance of the role; The performance results are generated into a hierarchical report, and feedback is provided on the process bottlenecks existing in each of the key steps to optimize the evaluation results.

3. The method for evaluating the value of medical business work based on key steps as claimed in claim 1, characterized in that: The dynamic adjustment mechanism automatically adjusts based on historical performance data, identifies bottlenecks in different medical business modules, determines which roles play a decisive role in the bottlenecks, and modifies the contribution weights accordingly; The identification of the bottleneck link is based on the K-means cluster analysis of historical data, combined with the scoring results of fuzzy comprehensive evaluation, and the weight adjustment formula constructed using historical data is: W i,j '=W i,j ×(1+γ·R i,j ), where W i,j ′ is the modified weight, γ is the weight adjustment coefficient, R i,j The historical performance of the role in the bottleneck link.

4. The method for evaluating the value of medical service work based on key steps according to claim 1, characterized in that: The evaluation method also includes calculating performance rewards for situations where the workload exceeds the standard in the medical process, and the calculation method is: Gm=Bm+λ·(Nm-Tm), where Gm is the incentive value of the character, Bm is the basic incentive value, and N m is the actual amount of work completed, T m is the set basic workload, and λ is the incentive coefficient.

5. The method for evaluating the value of medical service work based on key steps according to claim 1, characterized in that: The evaluation method supports independent evaluation of different business modules, and performs differentiated processing according to the different complexity and execution difficulty of each key step in any business module. The weight setting of different modules is achieved by adjusting the fuzzy evaluation coefficient in the performance calculation. The weight setting is performed according to the following formula: Where Q i,j,k is the fuzzy adjustment coefficient of the kth indicator of the i-th role in the j-th step, T j is the total workload of the key steps, P i,j,p The character's performance in each step.

6. The method for evaluating the value of medical service work based on key steps according to claim 5, characterized in that: The evaluation method also includes long-term performance tracking of the participation of the roles in different business modules, and analyzing the changing trend of the contribution value based on historical data, and the analysis is implemented by the following formula: Among them, V i,j represents the final contribution value of the i-th role in the j-th key step, V i,j,0 is the basic contribution value, ΔV i,j,t is the contribution change value in the tth evaluation, and T is the evaluation period.

7. The method for evaluating the value of medical service work based on key steps as claimed in claim 2, characterized in that: The performance results are used to formulate a differentiated incentive mechanism for dynamic allocation based on actual contributions. The incentive mechanism calculates the final incentive value of each role through the following formula: Gi=Bi+α·(Vi-V0), where Gi is the total incentive value of the i-th character, Bi is the basic incentive, and V i is the final contribution value of the character, V0 is the set contribution benchmark value, and α is the incentive coefficient.

8. The method for evaluating the value of medical service work based on key steps according to claim 7, characterized in that: The method supports the output of multi-dimensional performance indicators and generates a comprehensive evaluation report based on multiple dimensions such as workload, work quality, business complexity, and historical performance. The report calculates the comprehensive performance value using the following formula: Among them, S i is the comprehensive performance value of the i-th role, W k is the weight of each dimension, P i,k is the performance of the character in the kth dimension, ζ is the weighting coefficient, G i,k Modifies the character's historical performance in this dimension.

9. The method for evaluating the value of medical service work based on key steps according to claim 1, characterized in that: The evaluation method introduces a process improvement feedback mechanism into the performance evaluation model. The process improvement feedback mechanism provides improvement suggestions based on the bottleneck analysis of each key step and performs adaptive adjustments in subsequent evaluation cycles. The steps of the process improvement feedback mechanism include: Identify abnormal key steps that affect work efficiency through historical data analysis; Special weight adjustment is made for the roles involved in the abnormal key steps; The performance of the participating roles is recalculated during the next evaluation cycle to drive process improvements.

10. A medical service work value evaluation system based on key steps, characterized in that: The evaluation system includes: Business module division module, used to divide the medical business process into multiple business modules and set the key steps of each business module; A role weight setting module, used to set the role of each key step and its contribution weight; A performance calculation module, used to calculate the work contribution value of each role in each key step; Performance optimization module, which optimizes the performance results of each role based on fuzzy evaluation method and K-means clustering algorithm; The performance report generation module is used to generate a performance evaluation report for each of the roles and output the final work value evaluation results.

Images