At the time of the study, Mary V. Davis, Elizabeth Mahanna, and Michael Zelek were with the North Carolina Institute for Public Health, Gillings School of Global Public Health, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill. Brenda Joly is with the Muskie School of Public Service, University of Southern Maine, Portland. William Riley is with the School of Public Health, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis. Pooja Verma and Jessica Solomon Fisher are with the National Association of County and City Health Officials, Washington, DC.
Am J Public Health. 2014 Jan;104(1):e98-104. doi: 10.2105/AJPH.2013.301413. Epub 2013 Nov 14.
We conducted case studies of 10 agencies that participated in early quality improvement efforts.
The agencies participated in a project conducted by the National Association of County and City Health Officials (2007-2008). Case study participants included health directors and quality improvement team leaders and members. We implemented multiple qualitative analysis processes, including cross-case analysis and logic modeling. We categorized agencies according to the extent to which they had developed a quality improvement culture.
Agencies were conducting informal quality improvement projects (n = 4), conducting formal quality improvement projects (n = 3), or creating a quality improvement culture (n = 4). Agencies conducting formal quality improvement and creating a quality improvement culture had leadership support for quality improvement, participated in national quality improvement initiatives, had a greater number of staff trained in quality improvement and quality improvement teams that met regularly with decision-making authority. Agencies conducting informal quality improvement were likely to report that accreditation is the major driver for quality improvement work. Agencies creating a quality improvement culture were more likely to have a history of evidence-based decision-making and use quality improvement to address emerging issues.
Our findings support previous research and add the roles of national public health accreditation and emerging issues as factors in agencies' ability to create and sustain a quality improvement culture.
我们对参与早期质量改进工作的 10 个机构进行了案例研究。
这些机构参与了国家县和城市卫生官员协会(2007-2008 年)开展的一个项目。案例研究参与者包括卫生主任和质量改进团队的领导和成员。我们实施了多种定性分析过程,包括跨案例分析和逻辑建模。我们根据机构发展质量改进文化的程度对机构进行了分类。
机构正在进行非正式的质量改进项目(n=4)、进行正式的质量改进项目(n=3)或正在创建质量改进文化(n=4)。开展正式质量改进和创建质量改进文化的机构具有领导层对质量改进的支持、参与国家质量改进计划、更多员工接受质量改进培训以及定期与决策机构举行会议的质量改进团队。开展非正式质量改进的机构可能会报告说,认证是质量改进工作的主要驱动力。创建质量改进文化的机构更有可能具有循证决策的历史,并利用质量改进来解决新出现的问题。
我们的研究结果支持先前的研究,并补充了国家公共卫生认证和新出现问题的作用,这些因素是机构创建和维持质量改进文化的能力的因素。