Measuring the Impact of Trauma in Greece: A Systematic Review of Greek Trauma Registries. Is Quality Improvement Achievable?

2018 ◽  
Vol 90 (2) ◽  
pp. 75-84 ◽  
Author(s):  
A. Prionas ◽  
A. Toulias ◽  
G. Tsoulfas ◽  
V. N. Papadopoulos
2021 ◽  
Vol 108 (Supplement_7) ◽  
Author(s):  
Rabiya Aseem ◽  
Costas Simillis ◽  
Jason Smith ◽  
Sonal Arora ◽  
Nikhil Pawa

Abstract Aims Quality improvement (QI) training in Junior Doctors (JDs) is essential for providing High Quality Care for patients and facilitating organisational success. The aim of this study was to systematically review the evidence on QI training in JDs and determine the impact and effectiveness of training methods. Methods A systematic review was conducted as per PRISMA guidelines. Searches were carried out using MEDLINE, EMBASE and HMIC for English-Language articles between January 2005 to December 2019. Selected articles underwent critical appraisal using the CASP criteria by two independent reviewers. A qualitative and thematic analysis was conducted. Results 43 studies were identified in a range of medical and surgical specialities. Common QI methodology included theoretical and project-based curricula with content focussing on PDSA cycles, root causes analyses and project development. Majority of studies reported improved knowledge, leadership skills and satisfaction. Mentorship and coaching were highly valued, but few studies adhered to this practice. Few studies demonstrated increased QI engagement. Key themes identified (i) Effectiveness of QI training (ii) Barriers to engagement (iii) Organizational culture of fostering QI. Conclusion There is growing mandate for training JDs in QI practices to enhance patient care. QI curricula targeting JDs have demonstrated improved knowledge and leadership skills. Nonetheless, significant barriers in QI engagement endure. Additional research is required to combat disengagement and assess sustainability of QI interventions in JDs. We further aim to introduce a pilot QI training programme for surgical JDs to enhance leadership skills.


BMJ ◽  
2008 ◽  
Vol 336 (7659) ◽  
pp. 1491-1494 ◽  
Author(s):  
Loes M T Schouten ◽  
Marlies E J L Hulscher ◽  
Jannes J E van Everdingen ◽  
Robbert Huijsman ◽  
Richard P T M Grol

PLoS ONE ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 16 (2) ◽  
pp. e0247297
Author(s):  
Khic-Houy Prang ◽  
Roxanne Maritz ◽  
Hana Sabanovic ◽  
David Dunt ◽  
Margaret Kelaher

Background Public performance reporting (PPR) of physician and hospital data aims to improve health outcomes by promoting quality improvement and informing consumer choice. However, previous studies have demonstrated inconsistent effects of PPR, potentially due to the various PPR characteristics examined. The aim of this study was to undertake a systematic review of the impact and mechanisms (selection and change), by which PPR exerts its influence. Methods Studies published between 2000 and 2020 were retrieved from five databases and eight reviews. Data extraction, quality assessment and synthesis were conducted. Studies were categorised into: user and provider responses to PPR and impact of PPR on quality of care. Results Forty-five studies were identified: 24 on user and provider responses to PPR, 14 on impact of PPR on quality of care, and seven on both. Most of the studies reported positive effects of PPR on the selection of providers by patients, purchasers and providers, quality improvement activities in primary care clinics and hospitals, clinical outcomes and patient experiences. Conclusions The findings provide moderate level of evidence to support the role of PPR in stimulating quality improvement activities, informing consumer choice and improving clinical outcomes. There was some evidence to demonstrate a relationship between PPR and patient experience. The effects of PPR varied across clinical areas which may be related to the type of indicators, level of data reported and the mode of dissemination. It is important to ensure that the design and implementation of PPR considered the perspectives of different users and the health system in which PPR operates in. There is a need to account for factors such as the structural characteristics and culture of the hospitals that could influence the uptake of PPR.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document