Egholm Cecilie Lindström, Helmark Charlotte, Doherty Patrick, Nilsen Per, Zwisler Ann-Dorthe, Bunkenborg Gitte
The Danish Knowledge Centre for Rehabilitation and Palliative Care, University of Southern Denmark and Odense University Hospital, Southern Region of Denmark, Vestergade 17, 5800, Nyborg, Denmark.
Department of Medicine, Holbaek University Hospital, Smedelundsgade 60, 4300, Holbaek, Region Zealand, Denmark.
BMC Health Serv Res. 2019 Feb 6;19(1):102. doi: 10.1186/s12913-019-3940-5.
The use of clinical quality registries as means for data driven improvement in healthcare seem promising. However, their use has been shown to be challenged by a number of aspects, and we suggest some may be related to poor implementation. There is a paucity of literature regarding barriers and facilitators for registry implementation, in particular aspects related to data collection and entry. We aimed to illuminate this by exploring how staff perceive the implementation process related to the registries within the field of cardiac rehabilitation in England and Denmark.
A qualitative, interview-based study with staff involved in collecting and/or entering data into the two case registries (England N = 12, Denmark N = 12). Interviews were analysed using content analysis. The Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research was used to guide interviews and the interpretation of results.
The analysis identified both similarities and differences within and between the studied registries, and resulted in clarification of staffs´ experiences in an overarching theme: ´Struggling with practices´ and five categories; the data entry process, registry quality, resources and management support, quality improvement and the wider healthcare context. Overall, implementation received little focused attention. There was a lack of active support from management, and staff may experience a struggle of fitting use of a registry into a busy and complex everyday practice.
The study highlights factors that may be important to consider when planning and implementing a new clinical quality registry within the field of cardiac rehabilitation, and is possibly transferrable to other fields. The results may thus be useful for policy makers, administrators and managers within the field and beyond. Targeting barriers and utilizing knowledge of facilitating factors is vital in order to improve the process of registry implementation, hence helping to achieve the intended improvement of care processes and outcomes.
将临床质量登记作为推动医疗保健数据驱动改进的手段似乎很有前景。然而,其应用在多个方面面临挑战,我们认为有些挑战可能与实施不力有关。关于登记实施的障碍和促进因素的文献较少,特别是与数据收集和录入相关的方面。我们旨在通过探讨英国和丹麦心脏康复领域的工作人员如何看待与登记相关的实施过程来阐明这一点。
对参与两个病例登记(英国n = 12,丹麦n = 12)数据收集和/或录入的工作人员进行基于访谈的定性研究。使用内容分析法对访谈进行分析。实施研究综合框架用于指导访谈和结果解释。
分析确定了所研究登记内部和之间的异同,并在一个总体主题“与实践作斗争”及五个类别中阐明了工作人员的经历:数据录入过程、登记质量、资源和管理支持、质量改进以及更广泛的医疗保健背景。总体而言,实施很少受到重点关注。缺乏管理层的积极支持,工作人员可能会在将登记的使用融入繁忙复杂的日常实践中感到困难。
该研究突出了在心脏康复领域规划和实施新的临床质量登记时可能需要考虑的重要因素,并且可能适用于其他领域。因此,研究结果可能对该领域内外的政策制定者、管理人员和经理有用。针对障碍并利用促进因素的知识对于改善登记实施过程至关重要,从而有助于实现预期的护理过程和结果的改善。