scholarly journals Public Reporting Helped Drive Quality Improvement In Outpatient Diabetes Care Among Wisconsin Physician Groups

2012 ◽  
Vol 31 (3) ◽  
pp. 570-577 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maureen A. Smith ◽  
Alexandra Wright ◽  
Christopher Queram ◽  
Geoffrey C. Lamb
BMJ Open ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 8 (2) ◽  
pp. e018826 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jacquie Boyang Lu ◽  
Kristin J Danko ◽  
Michael D Elfassy ◽  
Vivian Welch ◽  
Jeremy M Grimshaw ◽  
...  

BackgroundSocially disadvantaged populations carry a disproportionate burden of diabetes-related morbidity and mortality. There is an emerging interest in quality improvement (QI) strategies in the care of patients with diabetes, however, the effect of these interventions on disadvantaged groups remains unclear.ObjectiveThis is a secondary analysis of a systematic review that seeks to examine the extent of equity considerations in diabetes QI studies, specifically quantifying the proportion of studies that target interventions toward disadvantaged populations and conduct analyses on the impact of interventions on disadvantaged groups.Research design and methodsStudies were identified using Medline, HealthStar and the Cochrane Effective Practice and Organisation of Care database. Randomised controlled trials assessing 12 QI strategies targeting health systems, healthcare professionals and/or patients for the management of adult outpatients with diabetes were eligible. The place of residence, race/ethnicity/culture/language, occupational status, gender/sexual identity, religious affiliations, education level, socioeconomic status, social capital, plus age, disability, sexual preferences and relationships (PROGRESS-Plus) framework was used to identify trials that focused on disadvantaged patient populations, to examine the types of equity-relevant factors that are being considered and to explore temporal trends in equity-relevant diabetes QI trials.ResultsOf the 278 trials that met the inclusion criteria, 95 trials had equity-relevant considerations. These include 64 targeted trials that focused on a disadvantaged population with the aim to improve the health status of that population and 31 general trials that undertook subgroup analyses to assess the extent to which their interventions may have had differential impacts on disadvantaged subgroups. Trials predominantly focused on race/ethnicity, socioeconomic status and place of residence as potential factors for disadvantage in patients receiving diabetes care.ConclusionsLess than one-third of diabetes QI trials included equity-relevant considerations, limiting the relevance and applicability of their data to disadvantaged populations. There is a need for better data collection, reporting, analysis and interventions on the social determinants of health that may influence the health outcomes of patients with diabetes.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42013005165.


PLoS ONE ◽  
2013 ◽  
Vol 8 (12) ◽  
pp. e84464 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ignacio Ricci-Cabello ◽  
Isabel Ruiz-Perez ◽  
Antonio Rojas-García ◽  
Guadalupe Pastor ◽  
Daniela C. Gonçalves

2012 ◽  
Vol 33 (5) ◽  
pp. 500-506 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrew M. Morris ◽  
Stacey Brener ◽  
Linda Dresser ◽  
Nick Daneman ◽  
Timothy H. Dellit ◽  
...  

Introduction.Antimicrobial stewardship programs are being implemented in health care to reduce inappropriate antimicrobial use, adverse events, Clostridium difficile infection, and antimicrobial resistance. There is no standardized approach to evaluate the impact of these programs.Objective.To use a structured panel process to define quality improvement metrics for evaluating antimicrobial stewardship programs in hospital settings that also have the potential to be used as part of public reporting efforts.Design.A multiphase modified Delphi technique.Setting.Paper-based survey supplemented with a 1-day consensus meeting.Participants.A 10-member expert panel from Canada and the United States was assembled to evaluate indicators for relevance, effectiveness, and the potential to aid quality improvement efforts.Results.There were a total of 5 final metrics selected by the panel: (1) days of therapy per 1000 patient-days; (2) number of patients with specific organisms that are drug resistant; (3) mortality related to antimicrobial-resistant organisms; (4) conservable days of therapy among patients with community-acquired pneumonia (CAP), skin and soft-tissue infections (SSTI), or sepsis and bloodstream infections (BSI); and (5) unplanned hospital readmission within 30 days after discharge from the hospital in which the most responsible diagnosis was one of CAP, SSTI, sepsis or BSI. The first and second indicators were also identified as useful for accountability purposes, such as public reporting.Conclusion.We have successfully identified 2 measures for public reporting purposes and 5 measures that can be used internally in healthcare settings as quality indicators. These indicators can be implemented across diverse healthcare systems to enable ongoing evaluation of antimicrobial stewardship programs and complement efforts for improved patient safety.


2088 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 18-19 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kate Rexe ◽  
Steeve Vigneault ◽  
Jennifer Thornhill

2021 ◽  
Vol 45 (7) ◽  
pp. S4
Author(s):  
Shaily Brahmbhatt ◽  
Julie Ann Lawrence ◽  
Paulina Bleah ◽  
Amanda Mikalachki ◽  
Kristin Clemens

2014 ◽  
Vol 52 (3) ◽  
pp. 557-571 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maria Chiara Rossi ◽  
Riccardo Candido ◽  
Antonio Ceriello ◽  
Antonino Cimino ◽  
Paolo Di Bartolo ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document