Quality Management in Health Care最新文献

Background and objectives: Quality improvement (QI) and simulation employ complementary approaches to improve the care provided to patients. There is a significant opportunity to leverage these disciplines, yet little is known about how they are utilized in concert. The purpose of this study is to explore how QI and simulation have been used together in health care.

Methods: This scoping review includes studies published between 2015 and 2021 in 4 databases: CINAHL, Embase, PubMed, and Scopus.

Results: The search yielded 921 unique articles.18 articles met the inclusion criteria and specifically described QI and simulation collaborative projects. Of the 18 articles, 28% focused on improvements in patient care, 17% on educational interventions, 17% on the identification of latent safety threats (LSTs) that could have an impact on clinical care, 11% on the creation of new processes, 11% on checklist creation, and 6% on both LST identification and educational intervention. The review revealed that 61% of the included studies demonstrated a concurrent integration of simulation and QI activities, while 33% used a sequential approach.

Conclusions: There is a paucity of studies detailing the robust and synergistic use of QI and simulation. The findings of this review suggest a positive impact on patient safety when QI and simulation are used in tandem. The systematic integration of these disciplines and the use of established reporting guidelines can promote patient safety in practice and in the literature.

Background and objectives: A work environment where employees feel comfortable taking chances without fear and with sufficient protection from retaliation is psychologically safe. The objective of this study was to investigate the effects of leader training for nurse managers on psychological safety of clinical registered nurses.

Methods: The study was designed a longitudinal outcomes approach to assess nurse leader intervention (classes on leadership methods and psychological safety) with pre- and post-intervention measurement of nurse psychological safety at each time point.

Results: The intervention and nurse leader rounding were shown to increase individual psychological safety climate scores of clinical nurses.

Conclusion: Psychological safety is an important component to consider in a nursing leadership role. Leadership interventions that focus on the tenets of psychological safety and include methods of being present, such as nurse leader rounding, can foster a sense of a psychologically safe environment for clinical registered nurses.

Background and objectives: The COVID-19 pandemic caused a significant strain on world health care systems. The lack of trained and experienced staff was a complicated issue during the pandemic. To overcome insufficient staffing problems, the intrahospital transfer (IHT) strategy was implemented at Milad Hospital in Tehran during COVID-19. We evaluated the effectiveness of the IHT strategy in order to determine whether the strategy should be continued post-COVID.

Methods: Six supervisors with experience in COVID-19 wards and the IHT strategy were consulted to identify the advantages of continuing the IHT strategy and to evaluate the success and continuation of IHT factors. Then, the decision-making trial and evaluation laboratory (DEMATEL) method was used to establish a network of influence relationships among IHT strategy factors' success.

Results: The result showed that all criteria except increasing patient satisfaction (C1) and reducing waste of time (C8) are cause-and-effect criteria that affected other criteria.

Conclusion: The research findings have implications for improving the day-to-day experience of staff navigating transfers of patients between wards and paraclinic units. This study also highlights the theoretical value of the cross-disciplinary integration of medical decision issues and multiple-attribute decision-making methodologies.

Background and objectives: To address health care spending growth, coordinated care, and patient-centered primary care, most states in the United States have adopted value-based care coordination programs such as patient-centered medical homes (PCMHs). The objective of this study was to understand the relationship between having access to PCMHs and emergency department (ED) utilization for high cost/need children with autism and children with mental health disorders (MHDs).

Methods: This cross-sectional study included 87 723 children between ages 3 and 17 years in the 2016-2018 National Survey for Children's Health. Multivariate-adjusted logistic regression analyses were used to assess the association between ED and PCMH utilization for children with autism, with MHDs without autism, and others without autism or MHDs. Marginal predictions were used to examine whether PCMH utilization was moderated by health conditions.

Results: The results showed that children with a PCMH had a 16% reduction in the odds to visit the ED (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] = 0.84; confidence interval [CI], 0.77-0.92; P < .001). When compared with the reference group of children without autism and without MHDs, children with MHDs but without autism had 93% higher odds to visit the ED (aOR = 1.93; CI, 1.75-2.13; P < .001) and children with autism had 35% higher odds to visit the ED (aOR = 1.35; CI, 1.04-1.75; P = .023). Marginal effects results suggested that PCMHs reduced the odds of ED visits the most for children with MHDs without autism and reduced the predicted ED visits from 30.1% to 23.7% ( P < .001).

Conclusions: Primary care quality improvement through access to a PCMH reduced ED visits for children, but the effect varied by autism and MHD conditions. Future PCMH efforts should continue to support children with autism and address unmet needs for children with MHDs with a focus on needed care coordination, family-centered care, and referrals.

Background and objectives: The quality of health care in hospital at home (HaH) has been measured in different countries using simple indicators and clinical results that only contribute to some dimensions of the quality of health care. We sought to generate indicators to comprehensively evaluate the quality of health care provided to HaH users through the e-Delphi technique.

Methods: The e-Delphi technique was performed with the participation of 17 HaH experts. The methodological strategy applied in this study was divided into the following 3 phases: a preparatory phase; consultation phase; and consensus phase. Three rounds of consultations were conducted with experts. In round 1, they were asked to identify which aspects of HaH they believed should be evaluated using an indicator for each of the following 6 dimensions of health care quality: effectiveness; efficiency; timeliness; patient-centered care; equity; and safety. In round 2, they were asked to rate each indicator using a 5-point Likert-type scale with the following values: (1) Totally disagree; (2) Disagree; (3) Moderately agree; (4) Agree; and (5) Totally agree. The criteria for evaluating each indicator were as follows: (1) The indicator is a useful measure for assessing the quality of health care provided to HaH users. (2) The indicator is clearly and specifically written and does not require modification. (3) The indicator is essential and incorporates information that can be extracted from HaH program records. An indicator was considered approved if it received at least 65% approval from the expert panel for each evaluation criterion. In round 3, experts were asked to reassess their ratings, taking into account the opinions of the other experts. The reliability of this technique was ensured through credibility, reliability, and confirmability. We obtained ethical approval of the corresponding institutions and informed consent from the participating experts.

Results: Nine unpublished and reliable indicators were generated. In addition, 13 indicators were incorporated that evaluate aspects previously analyzed by other authors and/or national and international institutions, which were adapted to be used in HaH. The total indicators generated (n = 22) represented all dimensions of the quality of health care: safety; opportunity; effectiveness; efficiency; equity; and patient-centered care.

Conclusions: The 22 indicators generated through the e-Delphi technique permit a comprehensive evaluation of the quality of health care provided to HaH users.

Background and objectives: The integration of lean management in optimizing nursing workflow necessitates the careful examination of several factors, including nurses' work efficiency, patient experience, and health outcomes. To evaluate the extent of unfinished nursing care and patient satisfaction, we have incorporated the lean management approach into our quality improvement efforts. This proactive measure aims to address potential adverse outcomes, such as subpar inpatient experiences, escalated occurrence of adverse events, and decreased job satisfaction among nursing staff.

Methods: We utilized the lean management methodology of value stream mapping in a specific facility between February and August 2021, aiming to pinpoint the crucial areas for enhancing nurses' workflow. By employing fishbone diagrams, we thoroughly analyzed the underlying causes, and subsequently employed the Plan-Do-Study-Act model to execute interventions devised based on these identified causes. Interventions included: (1) specifying the time of doctors' conventional rounds; (2) changing unreasonable scheduling; (3) employing 5S management to manage nursing supplies; and (4) eliminating duplicate papers and electronic reports.

Results: After implementing these interventions, the rate of unfinished nursing reduced from 73.4% to 39.6%, and that of finished nursing care during the shift increased from 38.6% to 71.4%. Overtime was reduced from 37.2 ± 22.4 minutes to 14.1 ± 3.6 minutes. The total patient satisfaction score for the Patient Satisfaction Questionnaire short-form increased ( P < .05).

Conclusions: The lean management of quality improvement methodologies provides effective enhancement to the work efficiency of nurses.

Background and objectives: Previous studies have shown that improving quality management in the central sterile supply department (CSSD) is an effective measure to control and decrease hospital-acquired infections. This study aimed to establish nursing-sensitive quality indicators for CSSD nursing in China.

Methods: We drafted nursing-sensitive quality indicators on the basis of the Structure-Process-Outcome model, and then conducted 2 rounds of consultation with experts using a modified Delphi method to determine the indicators and scientific methods of measurement.

Results: We identified five CSSD nursing-sensitive quality indicators. Recovery rates of the 2 rounds of valid questionnaires were 100%. Expert authority coefficients were 0.810 and 0.902, respectively. Kendall's coefficients of concordance were 0.168 and 0.210, respectively ( P < .05).

Conclusion: Evidence-based nursing-sensitive quality indicators for the CSSD were established.

This article describes the development of an institutional quality improvement review board (QIRB) as an effective and efficient method for reviewing and overseeing institutional quality improvement (QI) initiatives. QI projects involve the systematic collection and analysis of data and the implementation of interventions designed to improve the quality of clinical care and/or educational programs for a distinct population in a specific setting. QI projects are fundamentally distinct from human subjects research (HuSR); however, the differences between them are subtle and highly nuanced. Determining whether a project meets the definition of QI or qualifies as HuSR, thus requiring institutional review board (IRB) review, can be confusing and frustrating. Nevertheless, this distinction is highly consequential due to the heavy regulatory requirements involved in HuSR and IRB oversight. Making the correct determination of a project's regulatory status is essential before the project begins. Project leaders may not realize that their work meets the definition of HuSR and, therefore, might conduct the project without appropriate IRB review. Therefore, best practices dictate that project leaders should not decide which type of institutional review is appropriate for their projects. In addition, when QI project teams attempt to disseminate the results of their work, documentation of formal review and approval is generally required by peer-reviewed journals and professional organizations. However, institutional review mechanisms are rarely available. Projects that do not meet the definition of HuSR fall outside the purview of IRBs and most institutions do not have an alternative review body. This creates frustration for both project leaders and IRB administrators. Apart from IRB review, a separate process for reviewing QI projects offers several benefits. These include (1) relieving the burden on busy IRB staff; (2) promoting scholarly activity; (3) protecting the institution, project leaders, and participants from HuSR conducted outside of appropriate IRB review; and (4) promoting rigorous QI methods.