Suppr超能文献

养老院中的质量改进研究:范围综述。

Quality improvement studies in nursing homes: a scoping review.

机构信息

University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, USA.

Duke University and Durham VA GRECC, Durham, USA.

出版信息

BMC Health Serv Res. 2021 Aug 12;21(1):803. doi: 10.1186/s12913-021-06803-8.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Quality improvement (QI) is used in nursing homes (NH) to implement and sustain improvements in patient outcomes. Little is known about how QI strategies are used in NHs. This lack of information is a barrier to replicating successful strategies. Guided by the Framework for Implementation Research, the purpose of this study was to map-out the use, evaluation, and reporting of QI strategies in NHs.

METHODS

This scoping review was completed to identify reports published between July 2003 through February 2019. Two reviewers screened articles and included those with (1) the term "quality improvement" to describe their methods, or reported use of a QI model (e.g., Six Sigma) or strategy (e.g., process mapping) (2), findings related to impact on service and/or resident outcomes, and (3) two or more NHs included. Reviewers extracted data on study design, setting, population, problem, solution to address problem, QI strategies, and outcomes (implementation, service, and resident). Vote counting and narrative synthesis were used to describe the use of QI strategies, implementation outcomes, and service and/or resident outcomes.

RESULTS

Of 2302 articles identified, the full text of 77 articles reporting on 59 studies were included. Studies focused on 23 clinical problems, most commonly pressure ulcers, falls, and pain. Studies used an average of 6 to 7 QI strategies. The rate that strategies were used varied substantially, e.g., the rate of in-person training (55%) was more than twice the rate of plan-do-study-act cycles (20%). On average, studies assessed two implementation outcomes; the rate these outcomes were used varied widely, with 37% reporting on staff perceptions (e.g., feasibility) of solutions or QI strategies vs. 8% reporting on fidelity and sustainment. Most studies (n = 49) reported service outcomes and over half (n = 34) reported resident outcomes. In studies with statistical tests of improvement, service outcomes improved more often than resident outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

This study maps-out the scope of published, peer-reviewed studies of QI in NHs. The findings suggest preliminary guidance for future studies designed to promote the replication and synthesis of promising solutions. The findings also suggest strategies to refine procedures for more effective improvement work in NHs.

摘要

背景

质量改进(QI)用于养老院(NH)实施和维持患者预后的改善。关于 NH 中如何使用 QI 策略知之甚少。这种信息的缺乏是复制成功策略的障碍。本研究以实施研究框架为指导,旨在绘制 NH 中 QI 策略的使用、评估和报告。

方法

本范围界定审查旨在确定 2003 年 7 月至 2019 年 2 月期间发表的报告。两名审查员筛选了文章,并包括以下文章:(1)使用“质量改进”一词描述其方法,或报告使用 QI 模型(例如,六西格玛)或策略(例如,流程映射),(2)与服务和/或居民结果的影响有关的发现,以及(3)包括两个或多个 NH。审查员提取了关于研究设计、环境、人群、问题、解决问题的方案、QI 策略和结果(实施、服务和/或居民)的数据。票数计数和叙述性综合用于描述 QI 策略的使用、实施结果以及服务和/或居民结果。

结果

在确定的 2302 篇文章中,有 77 篇全文报告了 59 项研究。研究重点关注 23 个临床问题,最常见的是压疮、跌倒和疼痛。研究平均使用 6 到 7 种 QI 策略。策略的使用率差异很大,例如,面对面培训的比例(55%)是计划-执行-研究-行动周期的两倍多(20%)。平均而言,研究评估了两个实施结果;这些结果的使用率差异很大,其中 37%报告了工作人员对解决方案或 QI 策略的看法(例如,可行性),而 8%报告了保真度和维持。大多数研究(n=49)报告了服务结果,超过一半(n=34)报告了居民结果。在具有改善统计检验的研究中,服务结果的改善频率高于居民结果。

结论

本研究绘制了 NH 中已发表的 QI 同行评审研究的范围。研究结果为旨在促进有前途的解决方案复制和综合的未来研究提供了初步指导。研究结果还为 NH 中更有效的改进工作提供了改进程序的策略。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/6034/8361800/7576be40b503/12913_2021_6803_Fig1_HTML.jpg

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