Landon Bruce E, Wilson Ira B, McInnes Keith, Landrum Mary Beth, Hirschhorn Lisa, Marsden Peter V, Gustafson David, Cleary Paul D
Harvard Medical School, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston, Massachusetts 02115, USA.
Ann Intern Med. 2004 Jun 1;140(11):887-96. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-140-11-200406010-00010.
Multi-institution collaborative quality improvement programs are a well-established and broadly applicable quality improvement strategy, but there is little systematic assessment their effectiveness.
To evaluate the effectiveness of a quality improvement collaborative in improving the quality of care for HIV-infected patients.
Controlled pre- and postintervention study.
Clinics receiving funding from the Ryan White Comprehensive AIDS Resources Emergency Act.
44 intervention clinics and 25 control clinics matched by location (urban or rural), region, size, and clinic type.
Changes in quality-of-care measures abstracted from medical records of pre- and postintervention samples of patients at each study clinic. Measures examined included use and effectiveness of antiretroviral therapy, screening and prophylaxis, and access to care.
A multi-institutional quality improvement collaborative (the "Breakthrough Series").
9986 patients were studied. Clinical and sociodemographic characteristics of the intervention and control patients were similar (P > 0.05). Differences in changes in the quality of care were not statistically significant. The proportion of patients with a suppressed viral load increased by 11 percentage points (from 40.1% to 51.1%) in the intervention group compared with 5.3 percentage points (from 43.6% to 48.8%) in the control group, but this difference was not statistically significant (P = 0.18). In addition, rates of appropriate screening tests and prophylaxis did not differ between intervention and control sites.
It was not possible to perform a pure randomized trial of the intervention or to assess other measures of quality, such as adherence and satisfaction.
This prospective, matched study of almost 10 000 patients found that a quality improvement collaborative did not significantly affect the quality of care. Additional research is needed to improve methods of teaching and implementing quality improvement programs to achieve better results.
多机构协作质量改进项目是一种成熟且广泛适用的质量改进策略,但对其有效性的系统评估较少。
评估质量改进协作在提高艾滋病毒感染患者护理质量方面的有效性。
干预前后对照研究。
接受瑞安·怀特综合艾滋病资源紧急法案资助的诊所。
44家干预诊所和25家对照诊所,根据地点(城市或农村)、地区、规模和诊所类型进行匹配。
从各研究诊所干预前后患者病历中提取的护理质量指标变化。检查的指标包括抗逆转录病毒疗法的使用和有效性、筛查和预防以及获得护理的情况。
多机构质量改进协作(“突破系列”)。
对9986名患者进行了研究。干预组和对照组患者的临床和社会人口统计学特征相似(P>0.05)。护理质量变化的差异无统计学意义。干预组病毒载量得到抑制的患者比例增加了11个百分点(从40.1%增至51.1%),而对照组增加了5.3个百分点(从43.6%增至48.8%),但这种差异无统计学意义(P = 0.18)。此外,干预组和对照组在适当筛查试验和预防率方面没有差异。
无法对干预措施进行纯粹的随机试验,也无法评估其他质量指标,如依从性和满意度。
这项对近10000名患者进行的前瞻性匹配研究发现,质量改进协作并未显著影响护理质量。需要进一步研究以改进教学和实施质量改进项目的方法,以取得更好的效果。