How to measure labour force in medical field?

According to New England journal of medicine; US spent in 2010 $2.6 trillion on healthcare, 56% of these expenditures went to wages. Moreover; 16.4 million represent 11.8 % of total employee labour force of US. The point as we mention here not how much the labour is important but we are referring to how their accomplishment measured. There are many studies and theories put numerous sophisticated barometers for all of their efforts but still the picture to identify the effort measurements among medical workers is hard to be declared. That because many indicators and work measurement indicators could not be able to identify the tasks with procedure cascade already implemented but also impossible to know exactly what time schedule in real or skills been followed within. In past; trying to draw task frame schedule to follow was not effective particularly if you even have no idea what human skills carried out of each. Task schedule frame work is more than effective with other scopes as military services and other on ground missions.

After many indicator study and analysis to the outcome of labour force measurement, I choose comparable indicator of work cascade procedures outcome. Calibration of the indicator is necessary regardless the field going to be applied. The effective nature of this indicator lies in drawing analytical comparable figures in order to determine the level of deviations from the work standards pathway already inserted in former work data. Subsequently; a process of comparable indicator calibration precisely applied with high data management particularly with registry. There are two sub-indicator of comparable measurement indicator;

First; single factor depending calibration method could work parallel to gross outcome& values added and that is the simplest form of comparable indicator calibration. The process determines the whole working steps in comparison with outcome or produced values. Clinicians and nurses the main category of field implementation ever than others and those who working directly to the public considered the most close ones. Received values and outcomes form together index called quantitative index of productivity measurement. That index would calculate mathematically depending on inserted data to assure the demanded level of calibration start point.

Second; multifactor depending calibration method that would more complicated related other inserts as capital, intermediate inputs and energy and more economically significant to multi-channels organization or providers and that more fit for integrated medical systems if authorized institutions would like to do proper calibrations to evaluate the capital productivity gain bench level to apply our main comparative indicator.

Comparative indicator of medical worker labour measurement is effective precisely and works well with integrated compound system layers to reach degree of standard deviation depending on previously introduced work calibration. There are many other work associated the whole process more than what written here but I prefer to keep it simple as possible. New modern technologies always forcing us to learn and teach new procedures of work evaluation trying to keep medical system sufficiently fit to medical society requirements. Full health J