scholarly journals What makes an effective Quality Improvement Manager? A qualitative study in the New Zealand Health System

2022 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Adeel Akmal ◽  
Nataliya Podgorodnichenko ◽  
Tim Stokes ◽  
Jeff Foote ◽  
Richard Greatbanks ◽  
...  

Abstract Purpose Quality improvement is an international priority, and health organisations invest heavily in this endeavour. Little, however, is known of the role and perspectives of Quality Improvement Managers who are responsible for quality improvement implementation. We explored the quality improvement managers’ accounts of what competencies and qualities they require to achieve day-to-day and long-term quality improvement objectives. Design Qualitative exploratory design using an interpretivist approach with semi-structured interviews analysed thematically. Setting and participants. Interviews were conducted with 56 quality improvement managers from 15 (out of 20) New Zealand District Health Boards. Participants were divided into two groups: traditional and clinical quality improvement managers. The former group consisted of those with formal quality improvement education—typically operations managers or process engineers. The latter group was represented by clinical staff—physicians and nurses—who received on-the-job training. Results Three themes were identified: quality improvement expertise, leadership competencies and interpersonal competencies. Effective quality improvement managers require quality improvement experience and expertise in healthcare environments. They require leadership competencies including sense-giving, taking a long-term view and systems thinking. They also require interpersonal competencies including approachability, trustworthiness and supportiveness. Traditional and clinical quality improvement managers attributed different value to these characteristics with traditional quality improvement managers emphasising leadership competencies and interpersonal skills more than clinical quality improvement managers. Conclusions We differentiate between traditional and clinical quality improvement managers, and suggest how both groups can be better prepared to be effective in their roles. Both groups require a comprehensive socialisation and training process designed to meet specific learning needs.

2019 ◽  
Vol 6 (Supplement_2) ◽  
pp. S413-S414
Author(s):  
Aldo Martinez ◽  
Deborah Parilla ◽  
Melissa Green ◽  
Anne Murphy ◽  
Sylvia Suarez-Ponce ◽  
...  

Abstract Background Urinary tract infections (UTIs) account for 34% of all healthcare-associated infections (HAI). Urinary catheters (UC) are placed in 15–25% of hospitalized patients and >75% of HAI UTIs are UC-related. Bacteria introduced via UC can colonize the bladder within 3 days. So, the greatest risk factor for acquiring a catheter-associated urinary tract infection (CAUTI) is prolonged use of indwelling UC. Nursing (RN) staff noted inconsistency with appropriate use of UC and commonly UC remained in place well after their original indication had expired. Methods As part of a multi-faceted approach for quality improvement and patient safety, we rolled out an Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ)-based initiative to reduce UC days/Standardized Utilization Ratio (SUR). Daily critical reviews of the indication for UC were conducted by two groups. First, frontline night shift RN staff identified patients who no longer had a valid justification for continued UC. They handed-off the information to day-shift RNs, who recommend removal of UC during daily rounds with the physician teams. A second review was performed by Clinical Quality Improvement Specialists (CQIS) based on defined criteria from our nursing decatheterization protocol. Their discontinue UC recommendations were also sent to the care teams. The critical reviews of UC for CAUTI reduction started with 4 ICUs in August 2018, with additional ICUs added in December, January and March. Monthly UC SURs were tracked Results Figure 1 shows the number of UCs recommended for removal by RNs vs. CQIS (bars), as well as the percent discordance between RNs and CQIS (line). CQIS identified many more removable UCs than the RNs (888 vs. 256). 211 UC were removed after RN recommendations, and an additional 386 UCs were removed as a result of the CQIS audits. Figure 2 shows the marked corresponding decline in our SUR over this intervention. Conclusion As more units participated in the initiative, we saw increasing numbers of “discontinue UC” recommendations. Over time there was also a moderate decrease in the discordance between RN and CQIS recommendations for UC removal. CQIS routinely identified many more UCs to be removed compared with RNs, and more than doubled the number of discontinued UC. Notably, the UC SUR markedly improved, decreasing from 0.98 to 0.78. Disclosures All authors: No reported disclosures.


2003 ◽  
Vol 16 (2) ◽  
pp. 1-5
Author(s):  
Lynette Lutes ◽  
Sarvesh Logsetty ◽  
Jan McGuinness ◽  
Joan M. Carlson

Explores the development of a clinical quality improvement pilot project at the University of Alberta Hospital and Stollery Children’s Hospital which aimed to establish a team of individuals that could disseminate a culture of quality improvement and develop a framework for a quality process that could be replicated and repeated. Outcomes of the clinical pilot project included improved performance as well as opportunities to learn some key lessons around team membership and involvement.


2007 ◽  
Vol 55 (10) ◽  
pp. 1663-1669 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joanne Lynn ◽  
Jeff West ◽  
Susan Hausmann ◽  
David Gifford ◽  
Rachel Nelson ◽  
...  

2011 ◽  
Vol 365 (26) ◽  
pp. e48 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stephen S. Rauh ◽  
Eric B. Wadsworth ◽  
William B. Weeks ◽  
James N. Weinstein

2019 ◽  
Vol 8 (3) ◽  
pp. e000490 ◽  
Author(s):  
Aidan Christopher Tan ◽  
Elizabeth Armstrong ◽  
Jacqueline Close ◽  
Ian Andrew Harris

ObjectivesThe value of a clinical quality registry is contingent on the quality of its data. This study aims to pilot methodology for data quality audits of the Australian and New Zealand Hip Fracture Registry, a clinical quality registry of hip fracture clinical care and secondary fracture prevention.MethodsA data quality audit was performed by independently replicating the data collection and entry process for 163 randomly selected patient records from three contributing hospitals, and then comparing the replicated data set to the registry data set. Data agreement, as a proxy indicator of data accuracy, and data completeness were assessed.ResultsAn overall data agreement of 82.3% and overall data completeness of 95.6% were found, reflecting a moderate level of data accuracy and a very high level of data completeness. Half of all data disagreements were caused by information discrepancies, a quarter by missing discrepancies and a quarter by time, date and number discrepancies. Transcription discrepancies only accounted for 1 in every 50 data disagreements. The sources of inaccurate and incomplete data have been identified with the intention of implementing data quality improvement.ConclusionsRegular audits of data abstraction are necessary to improve data quality, assure data validity and reliability and guarantee the integrity and credibility of registry outputs. A generic framework and model for data quality audits of clinical quality registries is proposed, consisting of a three-step data abstraction audit, registry coverage audit and four-step data quality improvement process. Factors to consider for data abstraction audits include: central, remote or local implementation; single-stage or multistage random sampling; absolute, proportional, combination or alternative sample size calculation; data quality indicators; regular or ad hoc frequency; and qualitative assessment.


2020 ◽  
Vol 46 (1) ◽  
pp. 47-59
Author(s):  
Bryce Blair ◽  
Mohammad Saud Khan ◽  
Rehan Iftikhar

This article aims to examine the evolution of the business accelerators and their impact in New Zealand over the course of last decade to develop a better understanding of the role accelerators have played within the New Zealand innovation ecosystem, their influence on the innovation community and how accelerators measure their success. An exploratory qualitative study was undertaken which mainly draws from semi-structured interviews with mentors, participants and senior executives of accelerator programs. Secondary data were collected from presentations on YouTube, consultancy reports and internal reporting to provide context for the interviewee’s perspective. New Zealand with its remote geographical location, distinct company environment and its uniqueness within the wider business environment and institutional configuration provides a novel context to this study. The findings indicate that after more than a decade of operations, long-term outcome and benefits of accelerators to New Zealand innovation ecosystem are still unclear.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document