Tiago S Jesus, Jan Struhar, Manrui Zhang, Dongwook Lee, Brocha Z Stern, Allen W Heinemann, Neil Jordan, Anne Deutsch
Near Real-Time Feedback (NRTF) on the patient's experience with care, coupled with data relay to providers, can inform quality-of-care improvements, including at the point of care. The objective is to systematically review contemporary literature on the impact of the use of NRTF and data relay to providers on standardized patient experience measures. Six scientific databases and five specialty journals were searched supplemented by snowballing search strategies, according to the registered study protocol. Eligibility included studies in English (2015-2023) assessing the impact of NRTF and data relay on standardized patient-reported experience measures as a primary outcome. Eligibility and quality appraisals were performed by two independent reviewers. An expert former patient (Patient and Family Advisory Council and communication sciences background) helped interpret the results. Eight papers met review eligibility criteria, including three randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and one non-randomized study. Three of these studies involved in-person NRTF prior to data relay (patient-level data for immediate corrective action or aggregated and peer-compared) and led to significantly better results in all or some of the experience measures. In turn, a kiosk-based NRTF achieved no better experience results. The remaining studies were pre-post designs with mixed or neutral results and greater risks of bias. In-person NRTF on the patient experience followed by rapid data relay to their providers, either patient-level or provider-level as peer-compared, can improve the patient experience of care. Reviewed kiosk-based or self-reported approaches combined with data relay were not effective. Further research should determine which approach (e.g. who conducts the in-person NRTF) will provide better, more efficient improvements and under which circumstances.
{"title":"Near real-time patient experience feedback with data relay to providers: a systematic review of its effectiveness.","authors":"Tiago S Jesus, Jan Struhar, Manrui Zhang, Dongwook Lee, Brocha Z Stern, Allen W Heinemann, Neil Jordan, Anne Deutsch","doi":"10.1093/intqhc/mzae053","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/intqhc/mzae053","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Near Real-Time Feedback (NRTF) on the patient's experience with care, coupled with data relay to providers, can inform quality-of-care improvements, including at the point of care. The objective is to systematically review contemporary literature on the impact of the use of NRTF and data relay to providers on standardized patient experience measures. Six scientific databases and five specialty journals were searched supplemented by snowballing search strategies, according to the registered study protocol. Eligibility included studies in English (2015-2023) assessing the impact of NRTF and data relay on standardized patient-reported experience measures as a primary outcome. Eligibility and quality appraisals were performed by two independent reviewers. An expert former patient (Patient and Family Advisory Council and communication sciences background) helped interpret the results. Eight papers met review eligibility criteria, including three randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and one non-randomized study. Three of these studies involved in-person NRTF prior to data relay (patient-level data for immediate corrective action or aggregated and peer-compared) and led to significantly better results in all or some of the experience measures. In turn, a kiosk-based NRTF achieved no better experience results. The remaining studies were pre-post designs with mixed or neutral results and greater risks of bias. In-person NRTF on the patient experience followed by rapid data relay to their providers, either patient-level or provider-level as peer-compared, can improve the patient experience of care. Reviewed kiosk-based or self-reported approaches combined with data relay were not effective. Further research should determine which approach (e.g. who conducts the in-person NRTF) will provide better, more efficient improvements and under which circumstances.</p>","PeriodicalId":13800,"journal":{"name":"International Journal for Quality in Health Care","volume":"36 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.7,"publicationDate":"2024-06-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141440396","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Correction to: Barriers and facilitators to health professionals' engagement in quality improvement initiatives: a mixed-methods systematic review.","authors":"","doi":"10.1093/intqhc/mzae056","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/intqhc/mzae056","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":13800,"journal":{"name":"International Journal for Quality in Health Care","volume":"36 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.7,"publicationDate":"2024-06-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141431856","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Shehnaz Alidina, Tuna Cem Hayirli, Adam Amiri, David Barash, Cindy Chwa, Augustino Hellar, James T Kengia, Innocent Kissima, Caroline D Mayengo, John G Meara, Winfrida C Mwita, Steven J Staffa, Leopold Tibyehabwa, Taylor Wurdeman, Ntuli A Kapologwe
Organizational learning is critical for delivering safe, high-quality surgical care, especially in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) where perioperative outcomes remain poor. While current investments in LMICs prioritize physical infrastructure, equipment, and staffing, investments in organizational learning are equally important to support innovation, creativity, and continuous improvement of surgical quality. This study aims to assess the extent to which health facilities in Tanzania's Lake Zone perform as learning organizations from the perspectives of surgical providers. The insights gained from this study can motivate future quality improvement initiatives and investments to improve surgical outcomes. We conducted a cross-sectional analysis using data from an adapted survey to explore the key components of organizational learning, including a supportive learning environment, effective learning processes, and encouraging leadership. Our sample included surgical team members and leaders at 20 facilities (health centers, district hospitals, and regional hospitals). We calculated the average of the responses at individual facilities. Responses that were 5+ on a 7-point scale or 4+ on a 5-point scale were considered positive. We examined the variation in responses by facility characteristics using a one-way ANOVA or Student's t-test. We used univariate and multiple regression to assess relationships between facility characteristics and perceptions of organizational learning. Ninety-eight surgical providers and leaders participated in the survey. The mean facility positive response rate was 95.1% (SD 6.1%). Time for reflection was the least favorable domain with a score of 62.5% (SD 35.8%). There was variation by facility characteristics including differences in time for reflection when comparing by level of care (P = .02) and location (P = .01), and differences in trying new approaches (P = .008), capacity building (P = .008), and information transfer (P = .01) when comparing public versus faith-based facilities. In multivariable analysis, suburban centers had less time for reflection than urban facilities (adjusted difference = -0.48; 95% CI: -0.95, -0.01; P = .046). Surgical team members reported more positive responses compared to surgical team leaders. We found a high overall positive response rate in characterizing organizational learning in surgery in 20 health facilities in Tanzania's Lake Zone. Our findings identify areas for improvement and provide a baseline for assessing the effectiveness of change initiatives. Future research should focus on validating the adapted survey and exploring the impact of strong learning environments on surgical outcomes in LMICs. Organizational learning is crucial in surgery and further research, funding, and policy work should be dedicated to improving learning cultures in health facilities.
{"title":"Organizational learning in surgery in Tanzania's health system: a descriptive cross-sectional study.","authors":"Shehnaz Alidina, Tuna Cem Hayirli, Adam Amiri, David Barash, Cindy Chwa, Augustino Hellar, James T Kengia, Innocent Kissima, Caroline D Mayengo, John G Meara, Winfrida C Mwita, Steven J Staffa, Leopold Tibyehabwa, Taylor Wurdeman, Ntuli A Kapologwe","doi":"10.1093/intqhc/mzae048","DOIUrl":"10.1093/intqhc/mzae048","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Organizational learning is critical for delivering safe, high-quality surgical care, especially in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) where perioperative outcomes remain poor. While current investments in LMICs prioritize physical infrastructure, equipment, and staffing, investments in organizational learning are equally important to support innovation, creativity, and continuous improvement of surgical quality. This study aims to assess the extent to which health facilities in Tanzania's Lake Zone perform as learning organizations from the perspectives of surgical providers. The insights gained from this study can motivate future quality improvement initiatives and investments to improve surgical outcomes. We conducted a cross-sectional analysis using data from an adapted survey to explore the key components of organizational learning, including a supportive learning environment, effective learning processes, and encouraging leadership. Our sample included surgical team members and leaders at 20 facilities (health centers, district hospitals, and regional hospitals). We calculated the average of the responses at individual facilities. Responses that were 5+ on a 7-point scale or 4+ on a 5-point scale were considered positive. We examined the variation in responses by facility characteristics using a one-way ANOVA or Student's t-test. We used univariate and multiple regression to assess relationships between facility characteristics and perceptions of organizational learning. Ninety-eight surgical providers and leaders participated in the survey. The mean facility positive response rate was 95.1% (SD 6.1%). Time for reflection was the least favorable domain with a score of 62.5% (SD 35.8%). There was variation by facility characteristics including differences in time for reflection when comparing by level of care (P = .02) and location (P = .01), and differences in trying new approaches (P = .008), capacity building (P = .008), and information transfer (P = .01) when comparing public versus faith-based facilities. In multivariable analysis, suburban centers had less time for reflection than urban facilities (adjusted difference = -0.48; 95% CI: -0.95, -0.01; P = .046). Surgical team members reported more positive responses compared to surgical team leaders. We found a high overall positive response rate in characterizing organizational learning in surgery in 20 health facilities in Tanzania's Lake Zone. Our findings identify areas for improvement and provide a baseline for assessing the effectiveness of change initiatives. Future research should focus on validating the adapted survey and exploring the impact of strong learning environments on surgical outcomes in LMICs. Organizational learning is crucial in surgery and further research, funding, and policy work should be dedicated to improving learning cultures in health facilities.</p>","PeriodicalId":13800,"journal":{"name":"International Journal for Quality in Health Care","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.6,"publicationDate":"2024-06-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141173934","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Vanessa L Dos Santos, Karen S Sato, Chris G Maher, Rubens V C Vidal, Guilherme H D Grande, Leonardo O P Costa, Gustavo C Machado, Giovanni E Ferreira, Rachelle Buchbinder, Crystian B Oliveira
Clinical care indicators for low back pain can be used to monitor healthcare practices and consequently be used to evaluate success of strategies to improve care quality. The aim of this study was to identify the clinical care indicators that have been used to measure appropriateness of health care for patients with low back pain. We conducted a systematic search of five electronic databases and Google to identify clinical care indicators that have been used to measure any aspect of care for people with low back pain. Care indicators were narratively described according to their type (i.e. structure, process, or outcomes) and categorized by their purpose (e.g. to measure aspects related to assessment, imaging requests, treatment/prevention, and outcomes). A total of 3562 and 2180 records were retrieved from electronic databases and Google searches, respectively. We identified 280 indicators related to low back pain care from 40 documents and publications. Most quality indicators were process indicators (n = 213, 76%), followed by structure (n = 41, 15%) and outcome indicators (n = 26, 9%). The most common indicators were related to imaging requests (n = 41, 15%), referral to healthcare providers (n = 30, 11%), and shared decision-making (n = 21, 7%). Our review identified a range of clinical care indicators that have been used to measure the quality of health care for people with low back pain. Our findings will support a Delphi study to reach international consensus on what would be the most important and feasible indicators for a minimum dataset to be collected globally.
{"title":"Clinical indicators to monitor health care in low back pain: a scoping review.","authors":"Vanessa L Dos Santos, Karen S Sato, Chris G Maher, Rubens V C Vidal, Guilherme H D Grande, Leonardo O P Costa, Gustavo C Machado, Giovanni E Ferreira, Rachelle Buchbinder, Crystian B Oliveira","doi":"10.1093/intqhc/mzae044","DOIUrl":"10.1093/intqhc/mzae044","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Clinical care indicators for low back pain can be used to monitor healthcare practices and consequently be used to evaluate success of strategies to improve care quality. The aim of this study was to identify the clinical care indicators that have been used to measure appropriateness of health care for patients with low back pain. We conducted a systematic search of five electronic databases and Google to identify clinical care indicators that have been used to measure any aspect of care for people with low back pain. Care indicators were narratively described according to their type (i.e. structure, process, or outcomes) and categorized by their purpose (e.g. to measure aspects related to assessment, imaging requests, treatment/prevention, and outcomes). A total of 3562 and 2180 records were retrieved from electronic databases and Google searches, respectively. We identified 280 indicators related to low back pain care from 40 documents and publications. Most quality indicators were process indicators (n = 213, 76%), followed by structure (n = 41, 15%) and outcome indicators (n = 26, 9%). The most common indicators were related to imaging requests (n = 41, 15%), referral to healthcare providers (n = 30, 11%), and shared decision-making (n = 21, 7%). Our review identified a range of clinical care indicators that have been used to measure the quality of health care for people with low back pain. Our findings will support a Delphi study to reach international consensus on what would be the most important and feasible indicators for a minimum dataset to be collected globally.</p>","PeriodicalId":13800,"journal":{"name":"International Journal for Quality in Health Care","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.7,"publicationDate":"2024-06-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141173802","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Christian Uggerby, Søren Valgreen Knudsen, Simon Grøntved, Agnete Lund Sørensen, Karen Lyng Larsen, Charlotte Kaae Schmidt, Tilde Jensen, Jens Ravnholt Pedersen, Jan Mainz
The 2020 onset of the COVID-19 pandemic globally strained healthcare. Healthcare systems worldwide had to rapidly reorganize, impacting service delivery, patient care, and care-seeking behaviors. This left little time to assess the pandemic's effects on patient safety. This paper investigates COVID-19's influence on patient safety in a Danish region, using data from the national reporting system for adverse events during the initial COVID-19 surge in early 2020. This retrospective analysis investigated how the early phase of the COVID-19 pandemic (January-September 2020) affected the incidence of adverse events in a Danish Region, comparing it to the same period in 2019. Data were sourced from the Danish Patient Safety Database and regional systems. Adverse events were reported numerically. Descriptive statistics were employed to describe the percentage difference in adverse events and hospital activity, as well as the rate of adverse events per 1000 activities. Additionally, COVID-19-specific adverse events from April 2020 to March 2021 were identified and analyzed, categorizing them into seven risk areas across various healthcare sectors. During Denmark's initial COVID-19 surge in early 2020, the North Denmark Region's hospitals reported a significant decrease in adverse events, with a 42.5% drop in March 2020 compared to March 2019. From January to September 2020, the number of adverse events dropped 8.5% compared to the same period in 2019. In the same period, hospital activity declined by 10.2%. The ratio of reported adverse events per 1000 hospital activities thus decreased in early 2020 but showed only a minor difference overall for January-September compared to 2019. Between April 2020 and March 2021, out of 5703 total adverse events, 324 (5.7%) were COVID-19 related. COVID-19-related events were categorized into seven distinct risk areas, reflecting diverse impacts across healthcare sectors including hospitals, general practices, pre-hospital care, and specialized services. The initial decline in reporting of adverse events likely resulted from rapid healthcare changes and under-prioritization of the reporting system during the acute phase. However, a near return to pre-pandemic reporting levels suggests a resilient reporting system despite the crisis. The study's strength lies in the comprehensive data from Danish reporting systems, though it acknowledges potential underreporting and doesn't measure the pandemic's overall impact on patient safety.
{"title":"Adverse events reporting during the COVID-19 pandemic in a Danish region: a retrospective analysis.","authors":"Christian Uggerby, Søren Valgreen Knudsen, Simon Grøntved, Agnete Lund Sørensen, Karen Lyng Larsen, Charlotte Kaae Schmidt, Tilde Jensen, Jens Ravnholt Pedersen, Jan Mainz","doi":"10.1093/intqhc/mzae049","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/intqhc/mzae049","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The 2020 onset of the COVID-19 pandemic globally strained healthcare. Healthcare systems worldwide had to rapidly reorganize, impacting service delivery, patient care, and care-seeking behaviors. This left little time to assess the pandemic's effects on patient safety. This paper investigates COVID-19's influence on patient safety in a Danish region, using data from the national reporting system for adverse events during the initial COVID-19 surge in early 2020. This retrospective analysis investigated how the early phase of the COVID-19 pandemic (January-September 2020) affected the incidence of adverse events in a Danish Region, comparing it to the same period in 2019. Data were sourced from the Danish Patient Safety Database and regional systems. Adverse events were reported numerically. Descriptive statistics were employed to describe the percentage difference in adverse events and hospital activity, as well as the rate of adverse events per 1000 activities. Additionally, COVID-19-specific adverse events from April 2020 to March 2021 were identified and analyzed, categorizing them into seven risk areas across various healthcare sectors. During Denmark's initial COVID-19 surge in early 2020, the North Denmark Region's hospitals reported a significant decrease in adverse events, with a 42.5% drop in March 2020 compared to March 2019. From January to September 2020, the number of adverse events dropped 8.5% compared to the same period in 2019. In the same period, hospital activity declined by 10.2%. The ratio of reported adverse events per 1000 hospital activities thus decreased in early 2020 but showed only a minor difference overall for January-September compared to 2019. Between April 2020 and March 2021, out of 5703 total adverse events, 324 (5.7%) were COVID-19 related. COVID-19-related events were categorized into seven distinct risk areas, reflecting diverse impacts across healthcare sectors including hospitals, general practices, pre-hospital care, and specialized services. The initial decline in reporting of adverse events likely resulted from rapid healthcare changes and under-prioritization of the reporting system during the acute phase. However, a near return to pre-pandemic reporting levels suggests a resilient reporting system despite the crisis. The study's strength lies in the comprehensive data from Danish reporting systems, though it acknowledges potential underreporting and doesn't measure the pandemic's overall impact on patient safety.</p>","PeriodicalId":13800,"journal":{"name":"International Journal for Quality in Health Care","volume":"36 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.6,"publicationDate":"2024-06-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141317265","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Jinhong Zhao, Bing-Long Wang, Xiaoping Qin, Yuanli Liu, Tingfang Liu
Substantial evidence indicates that leadership plays a critical role in an organization's success. Our study aims to conduct case studies on leadership attributes among China's five top-performing hospitals, examining their common practices. A semi-structured interview was conducted with 8 leaders, 39 managers, 19 doctors, and 16 nurses from the five sample hospitals in China. We collected information from these hospitals on the role of senior leadership, organizational governance, and social responsibility, aligning with the leadership assessment guidelines in the Baldrige Excellence Framework. Qualitative data underwent interpretation through content analysis, thematic analysis, and comparative analysis. This study adhered to the consolidated criteria for reporting qualitative research guidelines for reporting qualitative research. Our study revealed that the leaders of the five top-performing hospitals in China consistently established "Patient Needs First" as the core element of the hospital culture. Striving to build world-renowned hospitals with Chinese characteristics, the interviewees all believed strongly in scientific vigor, professionalism, and cooperative culture. The leaders adhered to a staff-centered approach, placing special emphasis on talent recruitment and development, creating a compensation system, and fostering a supportive environment conducive to enhancing medical knowledge, skills, and professional ethics. In terms of organizational governance, they continuously enhanced the communication between various departments and levels of staff, improved the quality and safety of medical care, and focused on innovative medical and scientific research, thereby establishing evidence-based, standardized hospital management with a feedback loop. Meanwhile, regarding social responsibility, they prioritized improvements in the quality of healthcare by providing international and domestic medical assistance, community outreach, and other programs. To a large extent, the excellent leadership of China's top-performing hospitals can be attributed to their commitment to a "Two-Pillared Hospital Culture," which prioritizes putting patient needs first and adopting a staff-centered approach. Furthermore, the leaders of these hospitals emphasize hospital performance, operations management, and social responsibility.
{"title":"Core elements of excellent hospital leadership: lessons from the five top-performing hospitals in China.","authors":"Jinhong Zhao, Bing-Long Wang, Xiaoping Qin, Yuanli Liu, Tingfang Liu","doi":"10.1093/intqhc/mzae046","DOIUrl":"10.1093/intqhc/mzae046","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Substantial evidence indicates that leadership plays a critical role in an organization's success. Our study aims to conduct case studies on leadership attributes among China's five top-performing hospitals, examining their common practices. A semi-structured interview was conducted with 8 leaders, 39 managers, 19 doctors, and 16 nurses from the five sample hospitals in China. We collected information from these hospitals on the role of senior leadership, organizational governance, and social responsibility, aligning with the leadership assessment guidelines in the Baldrige Excellence Framework. Qualitative data underwent interpretation through content analysis, thematic analysis, and comparative analysis. This study adhered to the consolidated criteria for reporting qualitative research guidelines for reporting qualitative research. Our study revealed that the leaders of the five top-performing hospitals in China consistently established \"Patient Needs First\" as the core element of the hospital culture. Striving to build world-renowned hospitals with Chinese characteristics, the interviewees all believed strongly in scientific vigor, professionalism, and cooperative culture. The leaders adhered to a staff-centered approach, placing special emphasis on talent recruitment and development, creating a compensation system, and fostering a supportive environment conducive to enhancing medical knowledge, skills, and professional ethics. In terms of organizational governance, they continuously enhanced the communication between various departments and levels of staff, improved the quality and safety of medical care, and focused on innovative medical and scientific research, thereby establishing evidence-based, standardized hospital management with a feedback loop. Meanwhile, regarding social responsibility, they prioritized improvements in the quality of healthcare by providing international and domestic medical assistance, community outreach, and other programs. To a large extent, the excellent leadership of China's top-performing hospitals can be attributed to their commitment to a \"Two-Pillared Hospital Culture,\" which prioritizes putting patient needs first and adopting a staff-centered approach. Furthermore, the leaders of these hospitals emphasize hospital performance, operations management, and social responsibility.</p>","PeriodicalId":13800,"journal":{"name":"International Journal for Quality in Health Care","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.6,"publicationDate":"2024-06-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11168336/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141156917","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The purpose of this paper is to describe the implementation and outcomes of a unique traumatic brain injury (TBI) screening initiative serving the community, with a focus on underserved populations. Idaho's definition of underserved populations includes people living in rural/frontier areas, people experiencing homelessness or intimate partner violence, people with co-occurring disorders, and people with cultural and/or linguistically diverse backgrounds. The goals of screenings are to help participants gain awareness about the likelihood of having experienced a TBI, bridge the gap in TBI reporting, and provide needed support to underserved populations in a rural state. Our work represents a cross-sectional study. Beginning in 2014, TBI screenings were conducted by the Institute of Rural Health within a public health university with several internal and external partners, as well as grant funding for work. Trained interprofessional health students and/or members of the Institute of Rural Health performed TBI screenings using the Ohio State University TBI Identification Method-Interview Form. Those who screened as likely experiencing a TBI received resources for care and follow-up telephone calls. Data were collected on the number of individuals screened and their results and reported using descriptive statistics. From 2014 to 2022, a total of 1333 individuals were screened at 23 different community events across Idaho. Over 30% of screened individuals reported a history of head or neck injury, primarily due to falls and being hit by objects. The majority of identified cases of TBI were characterized by no loss of consciousness or <30 min of unconsciousness. Screenings targeting underserved populations showed higher TBI prevalence. Targeting underserved populations proved valuable in identifying TBI cases. The collaborative and interprofessional approach of this screening is unique and highlights the potential to address complex health issues effectively. These findings offer valuable insights for others implementing TBI screening programs in community settings.
{"title":"Implementation and outcomes of a statewide TBI screening program for underserved populations.","authors":"Seyedeh Melika Akaberi, Elaine Nguyen, Glenda Carr, Russell Spearman, Stefanie Shadduck","doi":"10.1093/intqhc/mzae047","DOIUrl":"10.1093/intqhc/mzae047","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The purpose of this paper is to describe the implementation and outcomes of a unique traumatic brain injury (TBI) screening initiative serving the community, with a focus on underserved populations. Idaho's definition of underserved populations includes people living in rural/frontier areas, people experiencing homelessness or intimate partner violence, people with co-occurring disorders, and people with cultural and/or linguistically diverse backgrounds. The goals of screenings are to help participants gain awareness about the likelihood of having experienced a TBI, bridge the gap in TBI reporting, and provide needed support to underserved populations in a rural state. Our work represents a cross-sectional study. Beginning in 2014, TBI screenings were conducted by the Institute of Rural Health within a public health university with several internal and external partners, as well as grant funding for work. Trained interprofessional health students and/or members of the Institute of Rural Health performed TBI screenings using the Ohio State University TBI Identification Method-Interview Form. Those who screened as likely experiencing a TBI received resources for care and follow-up telephone calls. Data were collected on the number of individuals screened and their results and reported using descriptive statistics. From 2014 to 2022, a total of 1333 individuals were screened at 23 different community events across Idaho. Over 30% of screened individuals reported a history of head or neck injury, primarily due to falls and being hit by objects. The majority of identified cases of TBI were characterized by no loss of consciousness or <30 min of unconsciousness. Screenings targeting underserved populations showed higher TBI prevalence. Targeting underserved populations proved valuable in identifying TBI cases. The collaborative and interprofessional approach of this screening is unique and highlights the potential to address complex health issues effectively. These findings offer valuable insights for others implementing TBI screening programs in community settings.</p>","PeriodicalId":13800,"journal":{"name":"International Journal for Quality in Health Care","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.6,"publicationDate":"2024-06-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141173902","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Madeleine Winberg, Maria Hälleberg Nyman, Erika Fjordkvist, Ann Catrine Eldh, Eva Joelsson-Alm
Urinary retention is a healthcare complication putting patients at risk of unnecessary suffering and harm. Orthopaedic patients are known to face an increased such risk, calling for evidence-based preoperative assessment and corresponding measures to prevent bladder problems. The aim of this study was to evaluate healthcare professionals' adherence to risk assessment guidelines for urinary retention in hip surgery patients. This was an observational study from January 2021 to April 2021 with a descriptive and comparative design, triangulating three data sources: (I) Medical records for 1382 hip surgery patients across 17 hospitals in Sweden were reviewed for preoperative risk assessments for urinary retention and voiding-related variables at discharge; (II) The patients completed a survey regarding postoperative lower urinary tract symptoms, and; (III) data were extracted from a national quality registry regarding type of surgery, preoperative physical status, and perioperative urinary complications. Group differences were analysed with Chi-square/Fisher's exact test, t-test, Wilcoxon rank-sum test, or Mann-Whitney U-test. Logistic regression was used to analyse variables associated with completed risk assessments for urinary retention. Of all study participants, 23.4% (n = 323) had a preoperative documented risk assessment of urinary retention. Whether a risk assessment was performed was significantly associated with acute surgery [odds ratio (OR) 3.56, 95% confidence interval (CI) 2.48-5.12] and undergoing surgery at an academic hospital (OR 4.59, 95% CI 2.68-7.85). Acute patients were more often affected by urinary retention and had bladder issues and/or an indwelling catheter at discharge. More than every tenth patient (11. 9%, n = 53) completing the survey experienced intensified bladder problems after their hip surgery. The study shows a lack of adherence to risk assessment for urinary retention according to evidence-based guidelines, which negatively affects quality of care and patient safety.
{"title":"Adherence to evidence-based guidelines for prevention of urinary retention in hip surgery patients: a multicentre observational study.","authors":"Madeleine Winberg, Maria Hälleberg Nyman, Erika Fjordkvist, Ann Catrine Eldh, Eva Joelsson-Alm","doi":"10.1093/intqhc/mzae045","DOIUrl":"10.1093/intqhc/mzae045","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Urinary retention is a healthcare complication putting patients at risk of unnecessary suffering and harm. Orthopaedic patients are known to face an increased such risk, calling for evidence-based preoperative assessment and corresponding measures to prevent bladder problems. The aim of this study was to evaluate healthcare professionals' adherence to risk assessment guidelines for urinary retention in hip surgery patients. This was an observational study from January 2021 to April 2021 with a descriptive and comparative design, triangulating three data sources: (I) Medical records for 1382 hip surgery patients across 17 hospitals in Sweden were reviewed for preoperative risk assessments for urinary retention and voiding-related variables at discharge; (II) The patients completed a survey regarding postoperative lower urinary tract symptoms, and; (III) data were extracted from a national quality registry regarding type of surgery, preoperative physical status, and perioperative urinary complications. Group differences were analysed with Chi-square/Fisher's exact test, t-test, Wilcoxon rank-sum test, or Mann-Whitney U-test. Logistic regression was used to analyse variables associated with completed risk assessments for urinary retention. Of all study participants, 23.4% (n = 323) had a preoperative documented risk assessment of urinary retention. Whether a risk assessment was performed was significantly associated with acute surgery [odds ratio (OR) 3.56, 95% confidence interval (CI) 2.48-5.12] and undergoing surgery at an academic hospital (OR 4.59, 95% CI 2.68-7.85). Acute patients were more often affected by urinary retention and had bladder issues and/or an indwelling catheter at discharge. More than every tenth patient (11. 9%, n = 53) completing the survey experienced intensified bladder problems after their hip surgery. The study shows a lack of adherence to risk assessment for urinary retention according to evidence-based guidelines, which negatively affects quality of care and patient safety.</p>","PeriodicalId":13800,"journal":{"name":"International Journal for Quality in Health Care","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.7,"publicationDate":"2024-06-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11155696/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141156916","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Shuangjian Li, Xin Li, Dan Li, Qian Zhao, Liping Zhu, Tao Wu
The study aimed to assess the effects of breast-conserving surgery (BCS) versus mastectomy on survival and quality of life in Stages I, II, and III breast cancer, providing solid evidence for clinical decisions. We conducted a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials on breast cancer treatments, searching databases such as PubMed and the Cochrane Library to compare BCS, and mastectomy's effects on survival and quality of life. A combined total of 16 734 patients in the control group and 17 435 patients in the experimental group were included in this analysis. This meta-analysis used RevMan 5.3 (Cochrane Collaboration, Copenhagen, Denmark) software for analysis. Our meta-analysis of 34 169 patients from 11 studies showed that BCS significantly reduced the overall recurrence rate at a median follow-up of 29 months, with a mean difference of 1.27 and a 95% confidence interval of 1.19-1.36, strongly supporting its effectiveness (P < .00001). Furthermore, our analysis found no significant increase in 5-year local recurrence rates for BCS versus mastectomy, indicating its long-term effectiveness with a mean difference of 1.13 (95% confidence interval: [1.03, 1.24], P = .01). Additionally, there was a notable decrease in tissue ischaemic necrosis among patients who had received BCS, with a mean difference of 0.37 (95% confidence interval: [0.33, 0.42], P < .00001), underscoring its benefits and long-term viability. BCS resulted in fewer cases of tissue ischaemic necrosis and higher body image scores compared with mastectomy, suggesting that it is a preferable option for better cosmetic outcomes and potentially favourable effects on prognosis and quality of life.
背景:该研究旨在评估保乳手术(BCS)与乳房切除术对 I 期、II 期和 III 期乳腺癌患者生存期和生活质量的影响,为临床决策提供可靠证据:该研究旨在评估保乳手术(BCS)与乳房切除术对 I 期、II 期和 III 期乳腺癌患者的生存期和生活质量的影响,为临床决策提供可靠的证据:我们对乳腺癌治疗的随机对照试验进行了荟萃分析,搜索了 PubMed 和 Cochrane 图书馆等数据库,比较了保乳手术和乳房切除术对生存期和生活质量的影响。本次分析共纳入了 16734 名对照组患者和 17435 名实验组患者。这项荟萃分析使用 RevMan 5.3(丹麦哥本哈根 Cochrane Collaboration)软件进行分析:我们对 11 项研究中的 34,169 名患者进行的荟萃分析表明,在中位随访 29 个月后,保乳手术显著降低了总复发率,平均差异为 1.27,95% 置信区间为 1.19-1.36,有力地支持了保乳手术的有效性(p结论:与乳房切除术相比,保乳手术导致组织缺血性坏死的病例更少,身体形象评分更高,这表明保乳手术是一种可取的选择,可获得更好的美容效果,并对预后和生活质量产生潜在的有利影响。
{"title":"A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials comparing breast-conserving surgery and mastectomy in terms of patient survival rate and quality of life in breast cancer.","authors":"Shuangjian Li, Xin Li, Dan Li, Qian Zhao, Liping Zhu, Tao Wu","doi":"10.1093/intqhc/mzae043","DOIUrl":"10.1093/intqhc/mzae043","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The study aimed to assess the effects of breast-conserving surgery (BCS) versus mastectomy on survival and quality of life in Stages I, II, and III breast cancer, providing solid evidence for clinical decisions. We conducted a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials on breast cancer treatments, searching databases such as PubMed and the Cochrane Library to compare BCS, and mastectomy's effects on survival and quality of life. A combined total of 16 734 patients in the control group and 17 435 patients in the experimental group were included in this analysis. This meta-analysis used RevMan 5.3 (Cochrane Collaboration, Copenhagen, Denmark) software for analysis. Our meta-analysis of 34 169 patients from 11 studies showed that BCS significantly reduced the overall recurrence rate at a median follow-up of 29 months, with a mean difference of 1.27 and a 95% confidence interval of 1.19-1.36, strongly supporting its effectiveness (P < .00001). Furthermore, our analysis found no significant increase in 5-year local recurrence rates for BCS versus mastectomy, indicating its long-term effectiveness with a mean difference of 1.13 (95% confidence interval: [1.03, 1.24], P = .01). Additionally, there was a notable decrease in tissue ischaemic necrosis among patients who had received BCS, with a mean difference of 0.37 (95% confidence interval: [0.33, 0.42], P < .00001), underscoring its benefits and long-term viability. BCS resulted in fewer cases of tissue ischaemic necrosis and higher body image scores compared with mastectomy, suggesting that it is a preferable option for better cosmetic outcomes and potentially favourable effects on prognosis and quality of life.</p>","PeriodicalId":13800,"journal":{"name":"International Journal for Quality in Health Care","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.6,"publicationDate":"2024-05-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11141600/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140944941","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Quality improvement (QI) initiatives in healthcare are crucial for enhancing service quality and healthcare outcomes. The success of these initiatives depends on the active engagement of healthcare professionals, which can be influenced by several factors within the healthcare system. This systematic review synthesized the factors influencing healthcare professionals' engagement in QI projects, focusing on identifying both barriers and facilitators. A mixed methods systematic review (MMSR) was conducted using the JBI methodology for MMSR. Databases such as MEDLINE, CINAHL, Scopus, and Embase were searched for studies that explored barriers and facilitators to QI engagement of health professionals in the clinical setting. Methodological quality was assessed using the Mixed-Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT). The extracted data were synthesized using the JBI convergent integrated approach to MMSR. Eighteen studies (seven qualitative, nine quantitative, and two mixed-methods) published between 2007 and 2023 were included in the review. The analysis revealed barriers and facilitators to engagement in QI initiatives at different levels of the health system. At the QI program level, the engagement of health professionals to QI was influenced by the approach to QI, evidence underpinning the QI initiative, QI knowledge and training, and access to QI specialists. At the health professional level, barriers and facilitators were related to their organizational role, motivation, perceptions about QI, and collaborations with individuals and groups. At the organizational level, factors related to culture and climate, leadership, available resources (including human resource and workload, infrastructure, and incentives), and institutional priorities influenced health professionals' participation in QI. This review highlights the complex interplay of organizational, individual, and QI program level factors that influence the engagement of healthcare professionals in QI. Overcoming these complex barriers and leveraging facilitators is crucial for enhancing participation in QI efforts. The findings underscore the need for a multi-level strategy that focuses on creating a conducive organizational culture, providing robust leadership, and ensuring adequate resources and training for healthcare professionals. Such strategies hold the potential to enhance the effectiveness and sustainability of QI initiatives in healthcare settings.
{"title":"Barriers and facilitators to health professionals' engagement in quality improvement initiatives: a mixed-methods systematic review.","authors":"Joanna Elizalde, Jommel Lumibao, Lucylynn Lizarondo","doi":"10.1093/intqhc/mzae041","DOIUrl":"10.1093/intqhc/mzae041","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Quality improvement (QI) initiatives in healthcare are crucial for enhancing service quality and healthcare outcomes. The success of these initiatives depends on the active engagement of healthcare professionals, which can be influenced by several factors within the healthcare system. This systematic review synthesized the factors influencing healthcare professionals' engagement in QI projects, focusing on identifying both barriers and facilitators. A mixed methods systematic review (MMSR) was conducted using the JBI methodology for MMSR. Databases such as MEDLINE, CINAHL, Scopus, and Embase were searched for studies that explored barriers and facilitators to QI engagement of health professionals in the clinical setting. Methodological quality was assessed using the Mixed-Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT). The extracted data were synthesized using the JBI convergent integrated approach to MMSR. Eighteen studies (seven qualitative, nine quantitative, and two mixed-methods) published between 2007 and 2023 were included in the review. The analysis revealed barriers and facilitators to engagement in QI initiatives at different levels of the health system. At the QI program level, the engagement of health professionals to QI was influenced by the approach to QI, evidence underpinning the QI initiative, QI knowledge and training, and access to QI specialists. At the health professional level, barriers and facilitators were related to their organizational role, motivation, perceptions about QI, and collaborations with individuals and groups. At the organizational level, factors related to culture and climate, leadership, available resources (including human resource and workload, infrastructure, and incentives), and institutional priorities influenced health professionals' participation in QI. This review highlights the complex interplay of organizational, individual, and QI program level factors that influence the engagement of healthcare professionals in QI. Overcoming these complex barriers and leveraging facilitators is crucial for enhancing participation in QI efforts. The findings underscore the need for a multi-level strategy that focuses on creating a conducive organizational culture, providing robust leadership, and ensuring adequate resources and training for healthcare professionals. Such strategies hold the potential to enhance the effectiveness and sustainability of QI initiatives in healthcare settings.</p>","PeriodicalId":13800,"journal":{"name":"International Journal for Quality in Health Care","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.7,"publicationDate":"2024-05-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140898244","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}