Pearson Marjorie L, Wu Shinyi, Schaefer Judith, Bonomi Amy E, Shortell Stephen M, Mendel Peter J, Marsteller Jill A, Louis Thomas A, Rosen Mayde, Keeler Emmett B
RAND Corporation, Santa Monica, CA 90407, USA.
Health Serv Res. 2005 Aug;40(4):978-96. doi: 10.1111/j.1475-6773.2005.00397.x.
To measure organizations' implementation of Chronic Care Model (CCM) interventions for chronic care quality improvement (QI).
DATA SOURCES/STUDY SETTING: Monthly reports submitted by 42 organizations participating in three QI collaboratives to improve care for congestive heart failure, diabetes, depression, and asthma, and telephone interviews with key informants in the organizations.
We qualitatively analyzed the implementation activities of intervention organizations as part of a larger effectiveness evaluation of yearlong collaboratives. Key study variables included measures of implementation intensity (quantity and depth of implementation activities) as well as fidelity to the CCM.
DATA COLLECTION/EXTRACTION METHODS: We developed a CCM-based scheme to code sites' intervention activities and criteria to rate their depth or likelihood of impact.
The sites averaged more than 30 different change efforts each to implement the CCM. The depth ratings for these changes, however, were more modest, ranging from 17 percent to 76 percent of the highest rating possible. The participating organizations significantly differed in the intensity of their implementation efforts (p<.001 in both quantity and depth ratings). Fidelity to the CCM was high.
Collaborative participants were able, with some important variation, to implement large numbers of diverse QI change strategies, with high CCM fidelity and modest depth of implementation. QI collaboratives are a useful method to foster change in real world settings.
衡量各组织为改善慢性病护理质量(QI)而实施慢性病护理模式(CCM)干预措施的情况。
数据来源/研究背景:42个参与三项质量改进协作项目以改善充血性心力衰竭、糖尿病、抑郁症和哮喘护理的组织提交的月度报告,以及对这些组织关键信息提供者的电话访谈。
作为对为期一年的协作项目进行的一项更大规模有效性评估的一部分,我们对干预组织的实施活动进行了定性分析。主要研究变量包括实施强度(实施活动的数量和深度)以及对CCM的依从性衡量指标。
数据收集/提取方法:我们制定了一个基于CCM的方案,用于对各机构的干预活动进行编码,并制定了评估其深度或影响可能性的标准。
各机构平均每项为实施CCM开展了30多项不同的变革举措。然而,这些变革的深度评级较为一般,范围在最高评级的17%至76%之间。参与组织在实施力度的强度方面(数量和深度评级均p<.001)存在显著差异。对CCM的依从性较高。
协作项目参与者能够实施大量多样的质量改进变革策略,虽然存在一些重要差异,但对CCM的依从性较高,实施深度一般。质量改进协作项目是在现实环境中促进变革的一种有用方法。