Reporting standards, outcomes and costs of quality improvement studies in Ireland: a scoping review

被引:4
|
作者
McCarthy, Siobhan Eithne [1 ]
Jabakhanji, Samira Barbara [2 ]
Martin, Jennifer [3 ]
Flynn, Maureen Alice [3 ]
Sorensen, Jan [2 ]
机构
[1] RCSI Univ Med & Hlth Sci, Grad Sch Healthcare Management, Dublin, Ireland
[2] RCSI Univ Med & Hlth Sci, Healthcare Outcomes Res Ctr, Dublin, Ireland
[3] Natl Qual Improvement Team, Dublin, Ireland
关键词
quality improvement; quality measurement; cost-effectiveness; quality improvement methodologies; evaluation methodology; LEAN; 6; SIGMA; ECONOMIC-EVALUATION; CONSCIOUS CARE; HEALTH; INTERVENTIONS; IMPLEMENTATION; EFFICIENCY; CLINICIAN; PROJECTS; PROGRAM;
D O I
10.1136/bmjoq-2020-001319
中图分类号
R19 [保健组织与事业(卫生事业管理)];
学科分类号
摘要
Objectives To profile the aims and characteristics of quality improvement (QI) initiatives conducted in Ireland, to review the quality of their reporting and to assess outcomes and costs. Design Scoping review. Data sources Systematic searches were conducted in PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, Google Scholar, Lenus and rian.ie. Two researchers independently screened abstracts (n=379) and separately reviewed 43 studies identified for inclusion using a 70-item critique tool. The tool was based on the Quality Improvement Minimum Quality Criteria Set (QI-MQCS), an appraisal instrument for QI intervention publications, and health economics reporting criteria. After reaching consensus, the final dataset was analysed using descriptive statistics. To support interpretations, findings were presented at a national stakeholder workshop. Eligibility criteria QI studies implemented and evaluated in Ireland and published between January 2015 and April 2020. Results The 43 studies represented various QI interventions. Most studies were peer-reviewed publications (n=37), conducted in hospitals (n=38). Studies mainly aimed to improve the 'effectiveness' (65%), 'efficiency' (53%), 'timeliness' (47%) and 'safety' (44%) of care. Fewer aimed to improve 'patient-centredness' (30%), 'value for money' (23%) or 'staff well-being' (9%). No study aimed to increase 'equity'. Seventy per cent of studies described 14 of 16 QI-MQCS dimensions. Least often studies reported the 'penetration/reach' of an initiative and only 35% reported health outcomes. While 53% of studies expressed awareness of costs, only eight provided at least one quantifiable figure for costs or savings. No studies assessed the cost-effectiveness of the QI. Conclusion Irish QI studies included in our review demonstrate varied aims and high reporting standards. Strategies are needed to support greater stimulation and dissemination of QI beyond the hospital sector and awareness of equity issues as QI work. Systematic measurement and reporting of costs and outcomes can be facilitated by integrating principles of health economics in QI education and guidelines.
引用
收藏
页数:9
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] Improving the Quality of Reporting Studies of Quality Improvement: The SQUIRE Guidelines
    Sox, Harold C.
    ANNALS OF INTERNAL MEDICINE, 2008, 149 (09) : 683 - 683
  • [32] TDE Adopts the Standards for Quality Improvement Reporting Excellence (SQUIRE) Guidelines
    Fain, James A.
    DIABETES EDUCATOR, 2016, 42 (03): : 269 - 270
  • [33] SQUIRE-SIM (Standards for Quality Improvement Reporting Excellence for SIMulation)
    Stone, Kimberly P.
    Rutman, Lori
    Calhoun, Aaron W.
    Reid, Jennifer
    Maa, Tensing
    Bajaj, Komal
    Auerbach, Marc A.
    Cheng, Adam
    Davies, Louise
    Deutsch, Ellen
    Harwayne-Gidansky, Ilana
    Kessler, David O.
    Ogrinc, Greg
    Patterson, Mary
    Thomas, Anita
    Doughty, Cara
    SIMULATION IN HEALTHCARE-JOURNAL OF THE SOCIETY FOR SIMULATION IN HEALTHCARE, 2025, 20 (02): : 71 - 80
  • [34] Reporting quality of randomized controlled trials in prehabilitation: a scoping review
    Dominique Engel
    Giuseppe Dario Testa
    Daniel I. McIsaac
    Francesco Carli
    Daniel Santa Mina
    Gabriele Baldini
    Celena Scheede-Bergdahl
    Stéphanie Chevalier
    Linda Edgar
    Christian M. Beilstein
    Markus Huber
    Julio F. Fiore
    Chelsia Gillis
    Perioperative Medicine, 12
  • [35] Reporting quality of randomized controlled trials in prehabilitation: a scoping review
    Engel, Dominique
    Testa, Giuseppe Dario
    Mcisaac, Daniel I.
    Carli, Francesco
    Santa Mina, Daniel
    Baldini, Gabriele
    Scheede-Bergdahl, Celena
    Chevalier, Stephanie
    Edgar, Linda
    Beilstein, Christian M.
    Huber, Markus
    Fiore, Julio F.
    Gillis, Chelsia
    PERIOPERATIVE MEDICINE, 2023, 12 (01)
  • [36] From quality improvement to equality improvement projects: A scoping review and framework
    Gallifant, Jack
    Griffin, Molly
    Pierce, Robin L.
    Celi, Leo Anthony
    ISCIENCE, 2023, 26 (10)
  • [37] The current role of pentafecta in the reporting of radical cystectomy outcomes: a scoping review
    Mahmoud, Osama
    Al-Nader, Mulham
    Puellen, Lukas
    Tschirdewahn, Stephan
    Hadaschik, Boris A.
    TRANSLATIONAL ANDROLOGY AND UROLOGY, 2024, 13 (06) : 1037 - 1048
  • [38] The reporting quality and transparency of orthopaedic studies using Bayesian analysis requires improvement: A systematic review
    Bdair, Faris
    Mangala, Sophia
    Kashir, Imad
    Shing, Darren Young
    Price, John
    Shoaib, Murtaza
    Flood, Breanne
    Nademi, Samera
    Thabane, Lehana
    Madden, Kim
    CONTEMPORARY CLINICAL TRIALS COMMUNICATIONS, 2023, 33
  • [39] Comparing Expert Reported Outcomes to National Surgical Quality Improvement Program Risk Calculator-Predicted Outcomes: Do Reporting Standards Differ?
    Knight, B. Alexander
    Potretzke, Aaron M.
    Larson, Jeffrey A.
    Bhayani, Sam B.
    JOURNAL OF ENDOUROLOGY, 2015, 29 (09) : 1091 - 1099
  • [40] Adaptive clinical trials in surgery: A scoping review of methodological and reporting quality
    Staibano, Phillip
    Oulousian, Emily
    McKechnie, Tyler
    Thabane, Alex
    Luo, Samuel
    Gupta, Michael K.
    Zhang, Han
    Pasternak, Jesse D.
    Au, Michael
    Parpia, Sameer
    Young, J. E. M.
    Bhandari, Mohit
    PLOS ONE, 2024, 19 (05):