Basics of qualitative research: Grounded theory procedures and techniques

Evaluating the quality of medical care.

Background Plan–do–study–act (PDSA) cycles provide a structure for iterative testing of changes to improve quality of systems. The method is widely accepted in healthcare improvement; however there is little overarching evaluation of how the method is applied. This paper proposes a theoretical framework for assessing the quality of application of PDSA cycles and explores the consistency with which the method has been applied in peer-reviewed literature against this framework. Methods NHS Evidence and Cochrane databases were searched by three independent reviewers. Empirical studies were included that reported application of the PDSA method in healthcare. Application of PDSA cycles was assessed against key features of the method, including documentation characteristics, use of iterative cycles, prediction-based testing of change, initial small-scale testing and use of data

https://qualitysafety.bmj.com/content/qhc/23/4/290.full.pdf

Systematic review of the application of the plan–do–study–act method to improve quality in healthcare

From an historical and sociological perspective, ‘integrated care’ has emerged as part of institutional efforts to break up professional fiefdoms, especially of subspecialists entrenched in hospitals, and to reorganise services around clinically integrated pathways and services for the patients. It was the more enlightened part of what I have called the ‘buyers’ revolt’, which occurred in the 1980s when those who had long paid the bills (insurers, governments, employers) became so fed up by the waste, excesses, and variability of services delivered under professional dominance that they started to take forceful action w1x. This book is a masterpiece of historical work and organisational analysis of that revolt at its centre, the San Francisco Bay area.

/pdf/institutional-change-and-healthcare-organizations-from-x3os3sbx11.pdf

Institutional change and healthcare organizations: from professional dominance to managed care

Background Formal evaluations of programmes are an important source of learning about the challenges faced in improving quality in healthcare and how they can be addressed. The authors aimed to integrate lessons from evaluations of the Health Foundation's improvement programmes with relevant literature.

Methods The authors analysed evaluation reports relating to five Health Foundation improvement programmes using a form of ‘best fit’ synthesis, where a pre-existing framework was used for initial coding and then updated in response to the emerging analysis. A rapid narrative review of relevant literature was also undertaken.

Results The authors identified ten key challenges: convincing people that there is a problem that is relevant to them; convincing them that the solution chosen is the right one; getting data collection and monitoring systems right; excess ambitions and ‘projectness’; organisational cultures, capacities and contexts; tribalism and lack of staff engagement; leadership; incentivising participation and ‘hard edges’; securing sustainability; and risk of unintended consequences. The authors identified a range of tactics that may be used to respond to these challenges.

Discussion Securing improvement may be hard and slow and faces many challenges. Formal evaluations assist in recognising the nature of these challenges and help in addressing them.

https://qualitysafety.bmj.com/content/qhc/21/10/876.full.pdf

Ten challenges in improving quality in healthcare: lessons from the Health Foundation's programme evaluations and relevant literature.

Background:
The demand for the highest-quality patient care coupled with pressure on funding has led to the increasing use of quality improvement (QI) methodologies from the manufacturing industry. The aim of this systematic review was to identify and evaluate the application and effectiveness of these QI methodologies to the field of surgery.

Methods:
MEDLINE, the Cochrane Database, Allied and Complementary Medicine Database, British Nursing Index, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Embase, Health Business™ Elite, the Health Management Information Consortium and PsycINFO® were searched according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses statement. Empirical studies were included that implemented a described QI methodology to surgical care and analysed a named outcome statistically.

Results:
Some 34 of 1595 articles identified met the inclusion criteria after consensus from two independent investigators. Nine studies described continuous quality improvement (CQI), five Six Sigma, five total quality management (TQM), five plan-do-study-act (PDSA) or plan-do-check-act (PDCA) cycles, five statistical process control (SPC) or statistical quality control (SQC), four Lean and one Lean Six Sigma; 20 of the studies were undertaken in the USA. The most common aims were to reduce complications or improve outcomes (11), to reduce infection (7), and to reduce theatre delays (7). There was one randomized controlled trial.

Conclusion:
QI methodologies from industry can have significant effects on improving surgical care, from reducing infection rates to increasing operating room efficiency. The evidence is generally of suboptimal quality, and rigorous randomized multicentre studies are needed to bring evidence-based management into the same league as evidence-based medicine. Copyright © 2011 British Journal of Surgery Society Ltd. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Systematic review of the application of quality improvement methodologies from the manufacturing industry to surgical healthcare.

Introduction: Effective feedback from incident reporting systems in healthcare is essential if organisations are to learn from failures in the delivery of care. Despite the wide-scale development and implementation of incident reporting in healthcare, studies in the UK suggest that information concerning system vulnerabilities could be better applied to improve operational safety within organisations. In this article, the findings and implications of research to identify forms of effective feedback from incident reporting are discussed, to promote best practices in this area.

Methods: The research comprised a mixed methods review to investigate mechanisms of effective feedback for healthcare, drawing upon experience within established reporting programmes in high-risk industry and transport domains. Systematic searches of published literature were undertaken, and 23 case studies describing incident reporting programmes with feedback were identified for analysis from the international healthcare literature. Semistructured interviews were undertaken with 19 subject matter experts across a range of domains, including: civil aviation, maritime, energy, rail, offshore production and healthcare.

Results: In analysis, qualitative information from several sources was synthesised into practical requirements for developing effective feedback in healthcare. Both action and information feedback mechanisms were identified, serving safety awareness, improvement and motivational functions. The provision of actionable feedback that visibly improved systems was highlighted as important in promoting future reporting. Fifteen requirements for the design of effective feedback systems were identified, concerning: the role of leadership, the credibility and content of information, effective dissemination channels, the capacity for rapid action and the need for feedback at all levels of the organisation, among others. Above all, the safety-feedback cycle must be closed by ensuring that reporting, analysis and investigation result in timely corrective actions that effectively address vulnerabilities in existing work systems.

Conclusions: Limited research evidence exists concerning the issue of effective forms of safety feedback within healthcare. Much valuable operational knowledge resides in safety management communities within high-risk industries. Multiple means of feeding back recommended actions and safety information may be usefully employed to promote safety awareness, improve clinical processes and promote future reporting. Further work is needed to establish best practices for feedback systems in healthcare that effectively close the safety loop.

https://qualitysafety.bmj.com/content/qhc/18/1/11.full.pdf?18%2F1%2F11%3B18%2F1%2F11=

Feedback from incident reporting: information and action to improve patient safety

Background Due to its complexity, cancer care is increasingly being delivered by multidisciplinary tumor boards (MTBs). Few studies have investigated how best to organize and run MTBs to optimize clinical decision making. We developed and evaluated a multicomponent intervention designed to improve the MTB's ability to reach treatment decisions. Study Design We conducted a prospective longitudinal study during 16 months that evaluated MTB decision making for urological cancer patients at a university hospital in London, UK. After a baseline period, MTB improvement interventions (eg, MTBs checklist, MTB team training, and written guidance) were delivered sequentially. Outcomes measures were the MTB's ability to reach a decision, the quality of information presentation, and the quality of teamwork (as assessed by trained assessors using a previously validated observational assessment tool). The efficacy of the intervention was evaluated using multivariate analyses. Results There were 1,421 patients studied between December 2009 and April 2, 2011. All outcomes improved considerably between baseline and intervention implementation: the MTB's ability to reach a decision rose from 82.2% to 92.7%, quality of information presentation rose from 29.6% to 38.3%, and quality of teamwork rose from 37.8% to 43.0%. The MTB's ability to reach a treatment decision was related to the quality of available information ( r  = 0.298; p r  = 0.348; p Conclusions Multidisciplinary tumor board−delivered treatment is becoming the standard for cancer care worldwide. Our intervention is efficacious and applicable to MTBs and can improve decision making and expedite cancer care.

https://www.journalacs.org/article/S1072-7515(13)00351-7/pdf

Improving decision making in multidisciplinary tumor boards: prospective longitudinal evaluation of a multicomponent intervention for 1,421 patients.

Studying large-scale programmes to improve patient safety in whole care systems: challenges for research.

After recent UK policy developments, considerable attention has been focused upon how clinical specialties measure and report on the quality of care delivered to patients. Defining the right indicators alone is insufficient to close the feedback loop. This narrative review aims to describe and synthesize a diverse body of research relevant to the question of how information from quality indicators can be fed back and used effectively to improve care. Anaesthesia poses certain challenges in the identification of valid outcome indicators sensitive to variations in anaesthetic care. Metrics collected during the immediate post-anaesthetic recovery period, such as patient temperature, patient-reported quality of recovery, and pain and nausea, provide potentially useful information for the anaesthetist, yet this information is not routinely fed back. Reviews of the effects of feeding back performance data to healthcare providers suggest that this may result in small to moderate positive effects upon outcomes and professional practice, with stronger effects where feedback is integrated within a broader quality improvement strategy. The dominant model for use of data within quality improvement is based upon the industrial process control approach, in which care processes are monitored continuously for process changes which are rapidly detectable for corrective action. From this review and experience of implementing these principles in practice, effective feedback from quality indicators is timely, credible, confidential, tailored to the recipient, and continuous. Considerable further work is needed to understand how information from quality indicators can be fed back in an effective way to clinicians and clinical units, in order to support revalidation and continuous improvement.

Jonathan Benn

Papers

Systematic review of the application of quality improvement methodologies from the manufacturing industry to surgical healthcare.

Feedback from incident reporting: information and action to improve patient safety

Improving decision making in multidisciplinary tumor boards: prospective longitudinal evaluation of a multicomponent intervention for 1,421 patients.

Studying large-scale programmes to improve patient safety in whole care systems: challenges for research.

Using quality indicators in anaesthesia: feeding back data to improve care