Suppr超能文献

通过证据综合评估质量改进科学的现状:来自《弥合质量差距》系列的见解

Evaluating the state of quality-improvement science through evidence synthesis: insights from the closing the quality gap series.

作者信息

McDonald Kathryn M, Schultz Ellen M, Chang Christine

机构信息

Senior Scholar and Executive Director of the Center for Health Policy/Center for Primary Care and Outcomes Research at Stanford University in CA.

Project Coordinator at the Center for Health Policy/Center for Primary Care and Outcomes Research at Stanford University in CA.

出版信息

Perm J. 2013 Fall;17(4):52-61. doi: 10.7812/TPP/13-010. Epub 2013 Sep 13.

Abstract

CONTEXT

The Closing the Quality Gap series from the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality summarizes evidence for eight high-priority health care topics: outcomes used in disability research, bundled payment programs, public reporting initiatives, health care disparities, palliative care, the patient-centered medical home, prevention of health care-associated infections, and medication adherence.

OBJECTIVE

To distill evidence from this series and provide insight into the "state of the science" of quality improvement (QI).

METHODS

We provided common guidance for topic development and qualitatively synthesized evidence from the series topic reports to identify cross-topic themes, challenges, and evidence gaps as related to QI practice and science.

RESULTS

Among topics that examined effectiveness of QI interventions, we found improvement in some outcomes but not others. Implementation context and potential harms from QI activities were not widely evaluated or reported, although market factors appeared important for incentive-based QI strategies. Patient-focused and systems-focused strategies were generally more effective than clinician-focused strategies, although the latter approach improved clinician adherence to infection prevention strategies. Audit and feedback appeared better for targeting professionals and organizations, but not patients. Topic reviewers observed heterogeneity in outcomes used for QI evaluations, weaknesses in study design, and incomplete reporting.

CONCLUSIONS

Synthesizing evidence across topics provided insight into the state of the QI field for practitioners and researchers. To facilitate future evidence synthesis, consensus is needed around a smaller set of outcomes for use in QI evaluations and a framework and lexicon to describe QI interventions more broadly, in alignment with needs of decision makers responsible for improving quality.

摘要

背景

医疗保健研究与质量局的《缩小质量差距》系列总结了八个高度优先的医疗保健主题的证据:残疾研究中使用的结果、捆绑支付计划、公共报告倡议、医疗保健差异、姑息治疗、以患者为中心的医疗之家、预防医疗保健相关感染以及药物依从性。

目的

提炼该系列中的证据,并深入了解质量改进(QI)的“科学现状”。

方法

我们为主题开发提供了通用指南,并对该系列主题报告中的证据进行了定性综合,以确定与QI实践和科学相关的跨主题主题、挑战和证据差距。

结果

在研究QI干预措施有效性的主题中,我们发现一些结果有所改善,但其他结果并非如此。QI活动的实施背景和潜在危害并未得到广泛评估或报告,尽管市场因素似乎对基于激励的QI策略很重要。以患者为中心和以系统为中心的策略通常比以临床医生为中心的策略更有效,尽管后一种方法提高了临床医生对感染预防策略的依从性。审核和反馈对于针对专业人员和组织似乎更好,但对患者并非如此。主题评审人员观察到用于QI评估的结果存在异质性、研究设计存在缺陷以及报告不完整。

结论

跨主题综合证据为从业者和研究人员提供了对QI领域现状的洞察。为了促进未来的证据综合,需要围绕一套更小的用于QI评估的结果达成共识,并需要一个框架和词汇表来更广泛地描述QI干预措施,以符合负责提高质量的决策者的需求。

相似文献

2
4
Quality improvement strategies for diabetes care: Effects on outcomes for adults living with diabetes.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2023 May 31;5(5):CD014513. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD014513.
5
6
The future of Cochrane Neonatal.
Early Hum Dev. 2020 Nov;150:105191. doi: 10.1016/j.earlhumdev.2020.105191. Epub 2020 Sep 12.
9
10
Manually-generated reminders delivered on paper: effects on professional practice and patient outcomes.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2019 Dec 18;12(12):CD001174. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD001174.pub4.

引用本文的文献

2
Level of Patient Safety Culture Awareness Among Healthcare Workers.
J Multidiscip Healthc. 2023 Feb 2;16:321-332. doi: 10.2147/JMDH.S376623. eCollection 2023.
6
A comparative study on patient safety culture among emergency nurses in the public and private hospitals of Tabriz, Iran.
Nurs Open. 2020 Jan 28;7(3):768-775. doi: 10.1002/nop2.449. eCollection 2020 May.
7
Identifying and resolving the frustrations of reviewing the improvement literature: The experiences of two improvement researchers.
BMJ Open Qual. 2019 Jul 24;8(3):e000701. doi: 10.1136/bmjoq-2019-000701. eCollection 2019.
9
The "Waze" of Inequity Reduction Frameworks for Organizations: a Scoping Review.
J Gen Intern Med. 2019 Apr;34(4):604-617. doi: 10.1007/s11606-019-04829-7. Epub 2019 Feb 7.
10
Factors Related to Implementation and Reach of a Pragmatic Multisite Trial: The My Own Health Report (MOHR) Study.
J Am Board Fam Med. 2017 May-Jun;30(3):337-349. doi: 10.3122/jabfm.2017.03.160151.

本文引用的文献

8
Closing the quality gap: revisiting the state of the science (vol. 1: bundled payment: effects on health care spending and quality).
Evid Rep Technol Assess (Full Rep). 2012 Aug(208.1):1-155. doi: 10.23970/ahrqepcerta208.1.
9
Considering context in quality improvement interventions and implementation: concepts, frameworks, and application.
Acad Pediatr. 2013 Nov-Dec;13(6 Suppl):S45-53. doi: 10.1016/j.acap.2013.04.013.
10
Advancing the science of patient safety.
Ann Intern Med. 2011 May 17;154(10):693-6. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-154-10-201105170-00011.

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验