INTRODUCTION
There has always been the misconception that doctors and clinicians know best in regards to the health of human beings. Though true, technological advancements coupled with the dissemination of information have enabled the society to determine what is defined as good care. In this respect, the society as a general has managed to manage lifestyles, work towards better living and receive medical services perceived as good. In this essay we are going to try and determine the dimensions of quality care, their importance and the things that have changed the notion that the doctor is always right.
We are first going to determine the dimensions of quality care and their importance. This is a perception that the society has towards medical care; either good, substandard or bad. The dimension is a framework to quality management of healthcare facilities. There are basically six dimensions to quality care (Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, 2016) .
The first dimension of quality care is the safety accorded to the patients from the clinicians and doctors. In this regard, it is a requirement that the clinicians take necessary precautions to prevent any harm to patients from the services they provide .The second dimension time keeping. What this entails is that there should be proper time keeping which is to avoid any delay that can be harmful. This is both to the patients and clinicians. The third dimension in quality care delivery is that the service should be centered on the patient. Delivery of the services should focus on the preferences, the values and needs of the patient. Furthermore, the service providers should ensure that the clinical decisions and the laws that guide service delivery should be patient centered.
Two aspects in service delivery which seem to be inseparable are efficiency and effectiveness. Service delivery should be effective in the propect that the services should be provided to the people who are likely to benefit while avoiding provision to people who are not likely to benefit. These services are provided on the basic of scientific know kedge and research and thus under usage and misuse should be avoided at all circumstances. The efficiency of service delivery considers the waste of resources. This can be the waste of ideas, equipment, energy, technology, supplies etc.
The final aspect of quality service delivery is equitability. The services should be delivered on an equitability platform. These service should be delivered irrespective of the race, color, age, height, geographical location, socioeconomic status etc. From the six dimensions it can thus be viewed that effectiveness and safety are the core concern of service delivery.
The fact that doctors are always right is long gone. This can be attributed to some factors that have developed over time such as education, awareness and technology. The main factor is public awareness and health education. This has equipped the public with knowledge that enables individuals to determine the type of service and medication required (Roe, Wilson, & Doll, 2001).Furthermore, the fact that
CONCLUSION
The main considerations in the service delivery of healthcare is efficiency, patient centeredness and safety with others including time keeping and wastage. On the other hand, the evolution in technology and increase in health knowledge coupled with public awareness have cast aside the notion that the doctor always being right.
HOW RESOURCE ALLOCATION LOWERS HEALTH RISKS
INTRODUCTION
Over a period of time, the problem of resource allocation has persisted. Some of the challenges the allocation has been facing is the unequitable and the unjust allocation of resources. The Unequitable resource allocation has persisted mainly because there is no communication and consultation with medical practitioners. These practitioners are ignored from decisions concerning the allocations yet they are key to the process. In order to attain great benefits at lower risks it is absolutely important to equalize resource allocations to medical facilities. This article aims to show how equitable allocation of resources in medical facilities reduces medical risks occurred. Furthermore, it will show the help doctors give with their involvements in the resource allocations and how the allocation reduces health risks.
Mostly healthcare resources are limited but this is not a factor when it comes to the resources allocation. The resources are limited since there is a limitation when it comes to health care facilities constructions. Moreover, even care givers can fall sick thus limiting the amount of workers giving medical care services. These factors will always lead to the increase of demand to healthcare with limited supply to these services.
Approaches that have been followed in the previous times were based on materials failing to consider that for a fact it is medical care givers that turn those materials to healthcare. Ultimately, it is the doctors who should take head point in the distribution and in the access of these resources. Therefore, if professional care givers are not involved in the allocation of these material resources there would have been no progress (kluger, 2007).
Greatest benefits are achieved at lower risks when the required resources are available in a medical facility. Resources like medicine and instruments needed for treatments and care giving should be available in facilities that require them the most. For instance, in medical facilities in swampy areas, areas with stagnant waters and forests there should be adequate malaria related facilities  (WHO, 2008). It is essential to understand that in such areas there is a great possibility that residents will contact malaria easily. In order to reduce the risk of such diseases occurrences we need to place resources required to facilities in those areas.
Medical Vaccination drugs will be required so as to help in the reduction of diseases prone in certain areas. The information required in this will be easily given by health practitioners in those areas. Health workers tend to know their terrains and the diseases they treat mostly. In order to quell the effects of these diseases we need to allocate resources required as early as possible. The resource allocation problem was a menace to health risk reduction. This was mainly because it only concentrated in the equal allocation of these materials. Certain materials ended being in surplus to places that didn’t need them and the resources required ended up being less. With the inclusion of doctors’ say in the allocation of resources there has been a reduction of health related risks. This ensures the equity and the justified allocation of resources.
 
 
 
 
 
IMPLICIT AND EXPLICIT CRITERIA ASSESSMENT OF HEALTHCARE QUALITY
INTRODUCTION
It is a very important aspect to assess the quality of health care. The quality assessment determines the suitability of any health care resource to serve the purposes effectively and efficienmtly.Since the main goals of healthcare is to maintain the quality of life, provide treatment measures etc,the quality needs to be assessed. Some forms of assessment may include physician quality, maximalists and optima lists criteria, implicit and explicit criteria, some correlation between quality and some related factors, data obtained from medical records among others.In this essay we are going to focus on the implicit and explicit criteria of the assessment of health care quality and the usefulness and applicability of each criteria in quality assessment. That stated, we first have to differentiate the two criteria.
The physician review of medical records is known as implicit review and is attributed to the fact that it relies mainly on a worldwide impression of the quality of care. The review may have consistent results, attention to minor details and may be biased by the assessment of the reviewer. The implicit criteria of assessment has been known to easily adapt to any particular characteristic of a specific case.
On the other hand, explicit criteria of assessment refers to the nurses’ review and is so called because the assessment is on a well-defined criteria and is in most cases insensitive. This is in the prospect that the review can fail to identify a case that has been judged as being below standard. In the context of the two criteria for quality assessment, the explicit review can be biased while the implicit review can be insensitive (Saul, et al., 2002). To further enhance the quality of healthcare delivered, groups such as peer reviews and some research group use these medical records.
The two quality assessment criteria have are useful when it comes to the improvement and maintenance of the quality standards. To begin with the explicit assessment, it provides a critical and useful overview on the identity of patients and people with some sort of risk for quality of care problems. This is as per some test that was done on the performance of dosing patients affected by schizophrenia with antipsychotics (Robert, 2002).Furthermore, the explicit criteria has been known to produce very precise assessments at a very low cost.
On the part of the implicit criteria of assessment, they can easily adapt to the unique specifications of every case making separation very easy.
 
CONCLUSION
The expenditure of healthcare facilities has always been on the rise to cater for the healthcare needs of the growing society. The rise in the amounts used in healthcare facilities has prompted the intervention by to review the quality so as to cut down the costs. It is in this contest that there has been the review on an implicit and explicit front. The main purposes of the review can be to educate the practitioners, empowerment to the consumers and the establishment of high quality standards for review with minimum cost.
 
 
 

References

Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. (2016). The six domains of healthcare qua;lity. Retrieved Aug 26, 2017, from www.ahrq.gov/professionals/quality-patient-safety/talkingquality/create/sixdomains.html
kluger, E.-H. .. (2007, March 21). Resource Allocation in Healthcare:Implications of models of medicin as a profession. Retrieved from Mediscape Gneral Medicine.
Robert, O. R. (2002). USing an explicitguideline based criterion and implicit review to assess antipsychotic dosing performance for schizophrenia. International journal Qual Health care.
Roe, B., Wilson, K., & Doll, H. (2001). Public awareness and health education:findings from an evaluation of health services for incontinence in england. INt J Nurs Stud(1).

  1. N., Davis, R. B., Palmer, R. H., Cahalane, M., Hamel, M. B., Mukamal, K., . . . L. L. (2002). Discrepancies between explicit and implicit review. US National library for Medicine.

WHO. (2008). International Classification of diseases. Geneva.