The contribution of benchmarking to quality improvement in healthcare. A systematic literature review.

IF 4.7 Q2 MATERIALS SCIENCE, BIOMATERIALS ACS Applied Bio Materials Pub Date : 2022-02-02 DOI:10.1186/s12913-022-07467-8
Claire Willmington, Paolo Belardi, Anna Maria Murante, Milena Vainieri
{"title":"The contribution of benchmarking to quality improvement in healthcare. A systematic literature review.","authors":"Claire Willmington, Paolo Belardi, Anna Maria Murante, Milena Vainieri","doi":"10.1186/s12913-022-07467-8","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Benchmarking has been recognised as a valuable method to help identify strengths and weaknesses at all levels of the healthcare system. Despite a growing interest in the practice and study of benchmarking, its contribution to quality of care have not been well elucidated. As such, we conducted a systematic literature review with the aim of synthesizing the evidence regarding the relationship between benchmarking and quality improvement. We also sought to provide evidence on the associated strategies that can be used to further stimulate quality improvement.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We searched three databases (PubMed, Web of Science and Scopus) for articles studying the impact of benchmarking on quality of care (processes and outcomes). Following assessment of the articles for inclusion, we conducted data analysis, quality assessment and critical synthesis according to the PRISMA guidelines for systematic literature review.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 17 articles were identified. All studies reported a positive association between the use of benchmarking and quality improvement in terms of processes (N = 10), outcomes (N = 13) or both (N = 7). In the majority of studies (N = 12), at least one intervention, complementary to benchmarking, was undertaken to stimulate quality improvement. The interventions ranged from meetings between participants to quality improvement plans and financial incentives. A combination of multiple interventions was present in over half of the studies (N = 10).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The results generated from this review suggest that the practice of benchmarking in healthcare is a growing field, and more research is needed to better understand its effects on quality improvement. Furthermore, our findings indicate that benchmarking may stimulate quality improvement, and that interventions, complementary to benchmarking, seem to reinforce this improvement. Although this study points towards the benefit of combining performance measurement with interventions in terms of quality, future research should further analyse the impact of these interventions individually.</p>","PeriodicalId":2,"journal":{"name":"ACS Applied Bio Materials","volume":" ","pages":"139"},"PeriodicalIF":4.7000,"publicationDate":"2022-02-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8812166/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ACS Applied Bio Materials","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-022-07467-8","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MATERIALS SCIENCE, BIOMATERIALS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Benchmarking has been recognised as a valuable method to help identify strengths and weaknesses at all levels of the healthcare system. Despite a growing interest in the practice and study of benchmarking, its contribution to quality of care have not been well elucidated. As such, we conducted a systematic literature review with the aim of synthesizing the evidence regarding the relationship between benchmarking and quality improvement. We also sought to provide evidence on the associated strategies that can be used to further stimulate quality improvement.

Methods: We searched three databases (PubMed, Web of Science and Scopus) for articles studying the impact of benchmarking on quality of care (processes and outcomes). Following assessment of the articles for inclusion, we conducted data analysis, quality assessment and critical synthesis according to the PRISMA guidelines for systematic literature review.

Results: A total of 17 articles were identified. All studies reported a positive association between the use of benchmarking and quality improvement in terms of processes (N = 10), outcomes (N = 13) or both (N = 7). In the majority of studies (N = 12), at least one intervention, complementary to benchmarking, was undertaken to stimulate quality improvement. The interventions ranged from meetings between participants to quality improvement plans and financial incentives. A combination of multiple interventions was present in over half of the studies (N = 10).

Conclusions: The results generated from this review suggest that the practice of benchmarking in healthcare is a growing field, and more research is needed to better understand its effects on quality improvement. Furthermore, our findings indicate that benchmarking may stimulate quality improvement, and that interventions, complementary to benchmarking, seem to reinforce this improvement. Although this study points towards the benefit of combining performance measurement with interventions in terms of quality, future research should further analyse the impact of these interventions individually.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
标杆管理对提高医疗保健质量的贡献。系统的文献综述。
背景:基准测试已被公认为一种有价值的方法,有助于识别医疗系统各级的优势和劣势。尽管人们对基准测试的实践和研究越来越感兴趣,但它对护理质量的贡献尚未得到很好的阐明。因此,我们进行了一次系统的文献综述,目的是综合有关基准和质量改进之间关系的证据。我们还试图提供相关策略的证据,这些策略可用于进一步刺激质量改进。方法:我们在三个数据库(PubMed、Web of Science和Scopus)中搜索研究基准测试对护理质量(过程和结果)影响的文章。在对纳入的文章进行评估后,我们根据PRISMA系统文献综述指南进行了数据分析、质量评估和批判性综合。结果:共鉴定出17篇文章。所有研究都报告了基准测试的使用与过程质量改进之间的正相关(N = 10) ,结果(N = 13) 或两者(N = 7) 。在大多数研究中(N = 12) ,至少采取了一项干预措施,作为基准的补充,以促进质量改进。干预措施包括参与者之间的会议、质量改进计划和财政激励措施。超过一半的研究中存在多种干预措施的组合(N = 10) 结论:这篇综述的结果表明,医疗保健中的基准实践是一个不断发展的领域,需要更多的研究来更好地了解其对质量改进的影响。此外,我们的研究结果表明,基准测试可能会刺激质量改进,而与基准测试互补的干预措施似乎会加强这种改进。尽管这项研究指出了将绩效衡量与干预措施相结合在质量方面的好处,但未来的研究应进一步单独分析这些干预措施的影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
ACS Applied Bio Materials
ACS Applied Bio Materials Chemistry-Chemistry (all)
CiteScore
9.40
自引率
2.10%
发文量
464
期刊介绍: ACS Applied Bio Materials is an interdisciplinary journal publishing original research covering all aspects of biomaterials and biointerfaces including and beyond the traditional biosensing, biomedical and therapeutic applications. The journal is devoted to reports of new and original experimental and theoretical research of an applied nature that integrates knowledge in the areas of materials, engineering, physics, bioscience, and chemistry into important bio applications. The journal is specifically interested in work that addresses the relationship between structure and function and assesses the stability and degradation of materials under relevant environmental and biological conditions.
期刊最新文献
Correction to "Nucleic Acid FRET Sensing of Hydrogen Peroxide in Live Cells Using a Boronic Acid Nucleobase Surrogate". Aptamer-Functionalized Silica Particles for FRET-Based Fluorescence Switching. Direct Integration of Ionic Liquid Gel Sensors onto Microfibrous Face Mask Substrates for Wearable Respiratory Health Monitoring. Agitation-Driven Fusion Fabrication of Macroscopic Cell-Laden Cryogels. Issue Publication Information
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1