临床质量改进研究与实施科学的交叉

Barkoudah
{"title":"临床质量改进研究与实施科学的交叉","authors":"Barkoudah","doi":"10.12788/jcom.0099","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The Institute of Medicine brought much-needed attention to the need for process improvement in medicine with its seminal report To Err Is Human: Building a Safer Health System, which was issued in 1999, leading to the quality movement’s call to close health care performance gaps in Crossing the Quality Chasm: A New Health System for the 21st Century.1,2 Quality improvement science in medicine has evolved over the past 2 decades to include a broad spectrum of approaches, from agile improvement to continuous learning and improvement. Current efforts focus on Lean-based process improvement along with a reduction in variation in clinical practice to align practice with the principles of evidence-based medicine in a patient-centered approach.3 Further, the definition of quality improvement under the Affordable Care Act was framed as an equitable, timely, value-based, patient-centered approach to achieving population-level health goals.4 Thus, the science of quality improvement drives the core principles of care delivery improvement, and the rigorous evidence needed to expand innovation is embedded within the same framework.5,6 In clinical practice, quality improvement projects aim to define gaps and then specific steps are undertaken to improve the evidence-based practice of a specific process. The overarching goal is to enhance the efficacy of the practice by reducing waste within a particular domain. Thus, quality improvement and implementation research eventually unify how clinical practice is advanced concurrently to bridge identified gaps.7 System redesign through a patient-centered framework forms the core of an overarching strategy to support system-level processes. Both require a deep understanding of the fields of quality improvement science and implementation science.8 Furthermore, aligning clinical research needs, system aims, patients’ values, and clinical care give the new design a clear path forward. Patient-centered improvement includes the essential elements of system redesign around human factors, including communication, physical resources, and updated information during episodes of care. The patient-centered improvement design is juxtaposed with care planning and establishing continuum of care processes.9 It is essential to note that safety is rooted within the quality domain as a top priority in medicine.10 The best implementation methods and approaches are discussed and debated, and the improvement progress continues on multiple fronts.11 Patient safety systems are implemented simultaneously during the redesign phase. Moreover, identifying and testing the health care delivery methods in the era of competing strategic priorities to achieve the desirable clinical outcomes highlights the importance of implementation, while contemplating the methods of dissemination, scalability, and sustainability of the best evidence-based clinical practice. The cycle of quality improvement research completes the system implementation efforts. The conceptual framework of quality improvement includes multiple areas of care and transition, along with applying the best clinical practices in a culture that emphasizes continuous improvement and learning. At the same time, the operating principles should include continuous improvement in a simple and continuous system of learning as a core concept. Our proposed implementation approach involves taking simple and practical steps while separating the process from the outcomes measures, extracting effectiveness throughout the process. It is essential to keep in mind that building a proactive and systematic improvement environment requires a framework for safety, reliability, and effective care, as well as the alignment of the physical system, communication, and professional environment and culture (Figure). In summary, system design for quality improvement research should incorporate the principles and conceptual framework that embody effective implementation strategies, with a focus on operational and practical steps. Continuous improvement will be reached through the multidimensional development of current health care system metrics and the incorporation of implementation science methods.","PeriodicalId":15393,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Clinical Outcomes Management","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Intersection of Clinical Quality Improvement Research and Implementation Science\",\"authors\":\"Barkoudah\",\"doi\":\"10.12788/jcom.0099\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The Institute of Medicine brought much-needed attention to the need for process improvement in medicine with its seminal report To Err Is Human: Building a Safer Health System, which was issued in 1999, leading to the quality movement’s call to close health care performance gaps in Crossing the Quality Chasm: A New Health System for the 21st Century.1,2 Quality improvement science in medicine has evolved over the past 2 decades to include a broad spectrum of approaches, from agile improvement to continuous learning and improvement. Current efforts focus on Lean-based process improvement along with a reduction in variation in clinical practice to align practice with the principles of evidence-based medicine in a patient-centered approach.3 Further, the definition of quality improvement under the Affordable Care Act was framed as an equitable, timely, value-based, patient-centered approach to achieving population-level health goals.4 Thus, the science of quality improvement drives the core principles of care delivery improvement, and the rigorous evidence needed to expand innovation is embedded within the same framework.5,6 In clinical practice, quality improvement projects aim to define gaps and then specific steps are undertaken to improve the evidence-based practice of a specific process. The overarching goal is to enhance the efficacy of the practice by reducing waste within a particular domain. Thus, quality improvement and implementation research eventually unify how clinical practice is advanced concurrently to bridge identified gaps.7 System redesign through a patient-centered framework forms the core of an overarching strategy to support system-level processes. Both require a deep understanding of the fields of quality improvement science and implementation science.8 Furthermore, aligning clinical research needs, system aims, patients’ values, and clinical care give the new design a clear path forward. Patient-centered improvement includes the essential elements of system redesign around human factors, including communication, physical resources, and updated information during episodes of care. The patient-centered improvement design is juxtaposed with care planning and establishing continuum of care processes.9 It is essential to note that safety is rooted within the quality domain as a top priority in medicine.10 The best implementation methods and approaches are discussed and debated, and the improvement progress continues on multiple fronts.11 Patient safety systems are implemented simultaneously during the redesign phase. Moreover, identifying and testing the health care delivery methods in the era of competing strategic priorities to achieve the desirable clinical outcomes highlights the importance of implementation, while contemplating the methods of dissemination, scalability, and sustainability of the best evidence-based clinical practice. The cycle of quality improvement research completes the system implementation efforts. The conceptual framework of quality improvement includes multiple areas of care and transition, along with applying the best clinical practices in a culture that emphasizes continuous improvement and learning. At the same time, the operating principles should include continuous improvement in a simple and continuous system of learning as a core concept. Our proposed implementation approach involves taking simple and practical steps while separating the process from the outcomes measures, extracting effectiveness throughout the process. It is essential to keep in mind that building a proactive and systematic improvement environment requires a framework for safety, reliability, and effective care, as well as the alignment of the physical system, communication, and professional environment and culture (Figure). In summary, system design for quality improvement research should incorporate the principles and conceptual framework that embody effective implementation strategies, with a focus on operational and practical steps. Continuous improvement will be reached through the multidimensional development of current health care system metrics and the incorporation of implementation science methods.\",\"PeriodicalId\":15393,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Clinical Outcomes Management\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-06-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Clinical Outcomes Management\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.12788/jcom.0099\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"Medicine\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Clinical Outcomes Management","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.12788/jcom.0099","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

医学研究所(Institute of Medicine)在1999年发布的开创性报告《犯错即是人:建立一个更安全的卫生系统》(to Err Is Human: Building a Safer Health System)中,对医学过程改进的需求给予了急需的关注,这导致了质量运动在《跨越质量鸿沟》(Crossing The quality Chasm)中呼吁缩小卫生保健绩效差距。21世纪的新卫生系统1,2在过去的20年里,医学质量改进科学已经发展到包括从敏捷改进到持续学习和改进的广泛方法。目前的工作重点是基于精益的流程改进,同时减少临床实践中的变化,以使实践与以患者为中心的循证医学原则保持一致此外,根据《负担得起的医疗法案》,质量改进的定义是一种公平、及时、以价值为基础、以病人为中心的实现全民健康目标的方法因此,质量改进科学推动了改善护理服务的核心原则,扩大创新所需的严格证据也嵌入在同一框架中。5,6在临床实践中,质量改进项目旨在确定差距,然后采取具体步骤来改进特定过程的循证实践。总体目标是通过减少特定领域内的浪费来增强实践的有效性。因此,质量改进和实施研究最终统一了如何同时推进临床实践,以弥合已确定的差距通过以患者为中心的框架进行系统重新设计,形成了支持系统级流程的总体战略的核心。两者都需要对质量改进科学和实施科学领域有深刻的理解此外,将临床研究需求、系统目标、患者价值和临床护理结合起来,为新设计提供了一条清晰的前进道路。以患者为中心的改进包括围绕人为因素重新设计系统的基本要素,包括沟通、物理资源和护理期间的更新信息。以病人为中心的改善设计与护理计划并列,并建立连续的护理过程必须注意的是,安全性植根于质量领域,是医学的重中之重对最佳的实施方法和途径进行了讨论和辩论,并且在多个方面继续进行改进患者安全系统在重新设计阶段同时实施。此外,在竞争战略优先事项的时代,确定和测试医疗保健提供方法,以实现理想的临床结果,突出了实施的重要性,同时考虑最佳循证临床实践的传播、可扩展性和可持续性方法。周期质量改进研究完成了系统实施工作。质量改进的概念框架包括护理和过渡的多个领域,以及在强调持续改进和学习的文化中应用最佳临床实践。同时,其运作原则应包括以一个简单而持续的学习系统为核心理念的持续改进。我们建议的实施方法包括采取简单而实际的步骤,同时将过程与结果度量分开,在整个过程中提取有效性。重要的是要记住,建立一个主动和系统的改进环境需要一个安全、可靠和有效的护理框架,以及物理系统、通信、专业环境和文化的一致性(图)。总之,质量改进研究的系统设计应包括体现有效实施战略的原则和概念框架,重点是操作和实际步骤。通过当前卫生保健系统指标的多维发展和实施科学方法的结合,将实现持续改进。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
The Intersection of Clinical Quality Improvement Research and Implementation Science
The Institute of Medicine brought much-needed attention to the need for process improvement in medicine with its seminal report To Err Is Human: Building a Safer Health System, which was issued in 1999, leading to the quality movement’s call to close health care performance gaps in Crossing the Quality Chasm: A New Health System for the 21st Century.1,2 Quality improvement science in medicine has evolved over the past 2 decades to include a broad spectrum of approaches, from agile improvement to continuous learning and improvement. Current efforts focus on Lean-based process improvement along with a reduction in variation in clinical practice to align practice with the principles of evidence-based medicine in a patient-centered approach.3 Further, the definition of quality improvement under the Affordable Care Act was framed as an equitable, timely, value-based, patient-centered approach to achieving population-level health goals.4 Thus, the science of quality improvement drives the core principles of care delivery improvement, and the rigorous evidence needed to expand innovation is embedded within the same framework.5,6 In clinical practice, quality improvement projects aim to define gaps and then specific steps are undertaken to improve the evidence-based practice of a specific process. The overarching goal is to enhance the efficacy of the practice by reducing waste within a particular domain. Thus, quality improvement and implementation research eventually unify how clinical practice is advanced concurrently to bridge identified gaps.7 System redesign through a patient-centered framework forms the core of an overarching strategy to support system-level processes. Both require a deep understanding of the fields of quality improvement science and implementation science.8 Furthermore, aligning clinical research needs, system aims, patients’ values, and clinical care give the new design a clear path forward. Patient-centered improvement includes the essential elements of system redesign around human factors, including communication, physical resources, and updated information during episodes of care. The patient-centered improvement design is juxtaposed with care planning and establishing continuum of care processes.9 It is essential to note that safety is rooted within the quality domain as a top priority in medicine.10 The best implementation methods and approaches are discussed and debated, and the improvement progress continues on multiple fronts.11 Patient safety systems are implemented simultaneously during the redesign phase. Moreover, identifying and testing the health care delivery methods in the era of competing strategic priorities to achieve the desirable clinical outcomes highlights the importance of implementation, while contemplating the methods of dissemination, scalability, and sustainability of the best evidence-based clinical practice. The cycle of quality improvement research completes the system implementation efforts. The conceptual framework of quality improvement includes multiple areas of care and transition, along with applying the best clinical practices in a culture that emphasizes continuous improvement and learning. At the same time, the operating principles should include continuous improvement in a simple and continuous system of learning as a core concept. Our proposed implementation approach involves taking simple and practical steps while separating the process from the outcomes measures, extracting effectiveness throughout the process. It is essential to keep in mind that building a proactive and systematic improvement environment requires a framework for safety, reliability, and effective care, as well as the alignment of the physical system, communication, and professional environment and culture (Figure). In summary, system design for quality improvement research should incorporate the principles and conceptual framework that embody effective implementation strategies, with a focus on operational and practical steps. Continuous improvement will be reached through the multidimensional development of current health care system metrics and the incorporation of implementation science methods.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Glucagon Prescription Rates for Individuals With Type 1 Diabetes Mellitus Following Implementation of an Electronic Health Records Intervention Quality Improvement in Health Care: From Conceptual Frameworks and Definitions to Implementation The Hospitalist Triage Role for Reducing Admission Delays: Impacts on Throughput, Quality, Interprofessional Practice, and Clinician Experience of Care Redesign of Health Care Systems to Reduce Diagnostic Errors: Leveraging Human Experience and Artificial Intelligence Patient Safety in Transitions of Care: Addressing Discharge Communication Gaps and the Potential of the Teach-Back Method
×
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:481959085
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