Does Quality Improvement Implementation Affect Hospital Quality of Care?

2007 ◽  
Vol 85 (2) ◽  
pp. 3-12 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jeffrey A. Alexander ◽  
Bryan J. Weiner ◽  
Stephen M. Shortell ◽  
Laurence C. Baker
2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Astrid Van Wilder ◽  
Jonas Brouwers ◽  
Bianca Cox ◽  
Luk Bruyneel ◽  
Dirk De Ridder ◽  
...  

Abstract Background Quality improvement (QI) initiatives such as accreditation, public reporting, inspection and pay-for-performance are increasingly being implemented globally. In Flanders, Belgium, a government policy for acute-care hospitals incorporates aforementioned initiatives. Currently, questions are raised on the sustainability of the present policy. Objective First, to summarise the various initiatives hospitals have adopted under government encouragement between 2008 and 2019. Second, to study the perspectives of healthcare stakeholders on current government policy. Methods In this multi-method study, we collected data on QI initiative implementation from governmental and institutional sources and through an online survey among hospital quality managers. We compiled an overview of QI initiative implementation for all Flemish acute-care hospitals between 2008 (n = 62) and 2019 (n = 53 after hospital mergers). Stakeholder perspectives were assessed via a second survey available to all healthcare employees and a focus group with healthcare policy experts was consulted. Variation between professions was assessed. Results QI initiatives have been increasingly implemented, especially from 2016 onwards, with the majority (87%) of hospitals having obtained a first accreditation label and all hospitals publicly reporting performance indicators, receiving regular inspections and having entered the pay-for-performance initiative. On the topic of external international accreditation, overall attitudes within the survey were predominantly neutral (36.2%), while 34.5% expressed positive and 29.3% negative views towards accreditation. In examining specific professional groups in-depth, we learned 58% of doctors regarded accreditation negatively, while doctors were judged to be the largest contributors to quality according to the majority of respondents. Conclusions Hospitals have demonstrated increased efforts into QI, especially since 2016, while perceptions on currently implemented QI initiatives among healthcare stakeholders are heterogeneous. To assure quality of care remains a top-priority for acute-care hospitals, we recommend a revision of the current multicomponent quality policy where the adoption of all initiatives is streamlined and co-created bottom-up.


2021 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Nataliya Brima ◽  
Nick Sevdalis ◽  
K. Daoh ◽  
B. Deen ◽  
T. B. Kamara ◽  
...  

Abstract Background There is an urgent need to improve quality of care to reduce avoidable mortality and morbidity from surgical diseases in low- and middle-income countries. Currently, there is a lack of knowledge about how evidence-based health system strengthening interventions can be implemented effectively to improve quality of care in these settings. To address this gap, we have developed a multifaceted quality improvement intervention to improve nursing documentation in a low-income country hospital setting. The aim of this pilot project is to test the intervention within the surgical department of a national referral hospital in Freetown, Sierra Leone. Methods This project was co-developed and co-designed by in-country stakeholders and UK-based researchers, after a multiple-methodology assessment of needs (qualitative, quantitative), guided by a participatory ‘Theory of Change’ process. It has a mixed-method, quasi-experimental evaluation design underpinned by implementation and improvement science theoretical approaches. It consists of three distinct phases—(1) pre-implementation(project set up and review of hospital relevant policies and forms), (2) intervention implementation (awareness drive, training package, audit and feedback), and (3) evaluation of (a) the feasibility of delivering the intervention and capturing implementation and process outcomes, (b) the impact of implementation strategies on the adoption, integration, and uptake of the intervention using implementation outcomes, (c) the intervention’s effectiveness For improving nursing in this pilot setting. Discussion We seek to test whether it is possible to deliver and assess a set of theory-driven interventions to improve the quality of nursing documentation using quality improvement and implementation science methods and frameworks in a single facility in Sierra Leone. The results of this study will inform the design of a large-scale effectiveness-implementation study for improving nursing documentation practices for patients throughout hospitals in Sierra Leone. Trial registration Protocol version number 6, date: 24.12.2020, recruitment is planned to begin: January 2021, recruitment will be completed: December 2021.


1995 ◽  
Vol 112 (5) ◽  
pp. P111-P111
Author(s):  
Carl A. Patow

Educational objectives: To understand the principles of continuous quality improvement and to use these principles to enhance patient satisfaction through increased efficiency and improved quality of care.


2016 ◽  
Vol 7 (3) ◽  
pp. 126-129 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sreenivas Koka ◽  
Galya Raz

What does ‘value’ mean? In the context of dental care, it can be defined as the quality of care received by a patient divided by the cost to the patient of receiving that care. In other words: V =Q/C, where Q equals the quality improvement over time, which most patients view in the context of the outcome, the service provided and safety/risk management, and C equals the financial, biological and time cost to the patient. Here, the need for, and implications of, value-based density for clinicians and patients alike are explored.


Diabetes Care ◽  
2008 ◽  
Vol 31 (11) ◽  
pp. 2166-2168 ◽  
Author(s):  
M. C.E. Rossi ◽  
A. Nicolucci ◽  
A. Arcangeli ◽  
A. Cimino ◽  
G. De Bigontina ◽  
...  

2012 ◽  
Vol 35 (6) ◽  
pp. 566-575 ◽  
Author(s):  
Matthew D. McHugh ◽  
Amy Witkoski Stimpfel

Circulation ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 142 (Suppl_3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Diana Benea ◽  
Valeria Raparelli ◽  
hassan behlouli ◽  
Louise Pilote ◽  
Rachel Dryer

Introduction: The extent to which race influences in-hospital quality of care among young adults with acute myocardial infarction (AMI) is unknown. We examined racial differences in in-hospital quality of AMI care in young adults and described the patient and/or clinical characteristics associated with potential disparities in care. Methods: Data from the GENESIS-PRAXY (Canada) and the VIRGO (U.S.) prospective cohorts of young adults with AMI were analyzed. Among a total of 4,048 adults with AMI (≤55 years) (median=49 years [IQR 44-52], 22% non-white, 58% women), we calculated an in-hospital quality of care score (QCS) for AMI (quality indicators divided by total, with higher scores indicating better care) based on AHA quality of care standards, reporting data disaggregated by race. We categorized race as white versus non-white, which included Black, Asian and North American Indigenous populations. Results: This cohort was comprised of 906 non-white individuals and 3142 white individuals. Non-white adults exhibited a clustering of adverse cardiac risk factors, psychosocial risk factors and comorbidities versus whites; they had higher rates of hypertension, diabetes, alcohol abuse and prior AMI and lower rates of physical activity. They were more likely to have a low SES and receive low social support, and were less likely to be employed, a primary earner, or married/living with a partner. Non-white individuals were also more likely to experience a NSTEMI and less likely to receive cardiac rehabilitation, smoking cessation counseling as well as dual antiplatelet therapy at discharge. Furthermore, non-white individuals had a lower crude QCS than whites (QCS=69.99 vs 73.29, P-value<0.0001). In the multivariable model adjusted for clinical and psychosocial factors, non-white race (LS Mean Difference=-1.49 95%CI -2.87, -0.11, P-value=0.0344) was independently associated with a lower in-hospital QCS. Conclusion: Non-white individuals with AMI exhibited higher rates of adverse psychosocial and clinical characteristics than white individuals yet non-white race was independently associated with lower in-hospital quality of care. Interventions are needed to improve quality of AMI care in non-white young adults.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document