Evans Christopher, Howes Daniel, Pickett William, Dagnone Luigi
Department of Emergency Medicine, Queen's University, Empire 3, Kingston General Hospital, 76 Stuart St., Kingston, Ontario, Canada, K7L 2V7.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2009 Oct 7;2009(4):CD007590. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD007590.pub2.
Traumatic injuries represent a considerable public health burden with significant personal and societal costs. The care of the severely injured patient in a trauma system progresses along a continuum that includes numerous interventions being provided by a multidisciplinary group of healthcare personnel. Despite the recent emphasis on quality of care in medicine, there has been little research to direct trauma clinicians and administrators on how optimally to monitor and improve upon the quality of care delivered within a trauma system. Audit filters are one mechanism for improving quality of care and are defined as specific clinical processes or outcomes of care that, when they occur, represent unfavorable deviations from an established norm and which prompt review and feedback. Although audit filters are widely utilized for performance improvement in trauma systems they have not been subjected to systematic review of their effectiveness.
To determine the effectiveness of using audit filters for improving processes of care and clinical outcomes in trauma systems.
Our search strategy included an electronic search of the Cochrane Injuries Group Specialized Register, the Cochrane EPOC Group Specialized Register, CENTRAL (The Cochrane Library 2008, Issue 4), MEDLINE, PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL, and ISI Web of Science: (SCI-EXPANDED and CPCI-S). We handsearched the Journal of Trauma, Injury, Annals of Emergency Medicine, Academic Emergency Medicine, and Injury Prevention. We searched two clinical trial registries: 1) The World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform and, 2) Clinical Trials.gov. We also contacted content experts for further articles. The most recent electronic search was completed in December 2008 and the handsearch was completed up to February 2009.
We searched for randomized controlled trials, controlled clinical trials, controlled before-and-after studies, and interrupted time series studies that used audit filters as an intervention for improving processes of care, morbidity, or mortality for severely injured patients.
Two authors independently screened the search results, applied inclusion criteria, and extracted data.
There were no studies identified that met the inclusion criteria for this review.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: We were unable to identify any studies of sufficient methodological quality to draw conclusions regarding the effectiveness of audit filters as a performance improvement intervention in trauma systems. Future research using rigorous study designs should focus on the relative effectiveness of audit filters in comparison to alternative quality improvement strategies at improving processes of care, functional outcomes, and mortality for injured patients.
创伤性损伤给公众健康带来了巨大负担,造成了重大的个人和社会成本。创伤系统中重伤患者的护理是一个连续的过程,包括多学科医疗人员提供的众多干预措施。尽管最近医学领域强调医疗质量,但对于如何最佳地监测和改善创伤系统内提供的医疗质量,指导创伤临床医生和管理人员的研究却很少。审核过滤器是提高医疗质量的一种机制,被定义为特定的临床过程或护理结果,当它们出现时,代表与既定标准的不利偏差,并促使进行审查和反馈。尽管审核过滤器在创伤系统中被广泛用于绩效改进,但其有效性尚未得到系统评价。
确定使用审核过滤器改善创伤系统中护理过程和临床结果的有效性。
我们的检索策略包括对Cochrane损伤组专业注册库、Cochrane EPOC组专业注册库、CENTRAL(Cochrane图书馆2008年第4期)、MEDLINE、PubMed、EMBASE、CINAHL和ISI科学网(SCI-EXPANDED和CPCI-S)进行电子检索。我们手工检索了《创伤杂志》《损伤》《急诊医学年鉴》《学术急诊医学》和《伤害预防》。我们检索了两个临床试验注册库:1)世界卫生组织国际临床试验注册平台,2)ClinicalTrials.gov。我们还联系了内容专家以获取更多文章。最近的电子检索于2008年12月完成,手工检索截至2009年2月。
我们检索了随机对照试验、对照临床试验、前后对照研究以及中断时间序列研究,这些研究将审核过滤器作为一种干预措施,用于改善重伤患者的护理过程、发病率或死亡率。
两位作者独立筛选检索结果,应用纳入标准并提取数据。
未发现符合本综述纳入标准的研究。
我们无法确定任何方法学质量足够高的研究,以得出关于审核过滤器作为创伤系统绩效改进干预措施有效性的结论。未来使用严格研究设计的研究应关注审核过滤器与其他质量改进策略相比,在改善受伤患者的护理过程、功能结局和死亡率方面的相对有效性。