Evaluating quality improvement at scale
A pilot study on routine reporting for executive board governance in a UK National Health Service organisation
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 21456814 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Kia‐Chong Chua (0000-0002-6693-6333, King's College London, corresponding author), Claire Henderson (0000-0002-6998-5659, King's College London), Barbara Grey (South London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust), Michael Holland (0000-0002-9173-4100, South London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust), Nick Sevdalis (0000-0001-7560-8924, King's College London) |
| Year | 2023 |
| Volume | 97 |
| Pages | 102222 |
| Publication date | 2023-04-01 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Evaluation and Program Planning (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0149-7189 • E-ISSN: 1873-7870 |
| Publisher | Elsevier BV (PUBLISHER) |
| DOI | 10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2022.102222 |
| PMID | 36586303 |
| OpenAlex | W4313367989 |
| Language | EN |
| References cited | 25 |
BACKGROUND: Quality improvement (QI) in healthcare is a cultural transformation process. We explored how routine reporting could be developed to aid visibility of the process for QI governance. METHOD: A retrospective evaluation of QI projects in a large healthcare organisation was conducted. We used an online survey so that the data accrual process resembled routine reporting to help identify implementation challenges. A purposive sample of QI projects was targeted to maximise contrast between projects that were or were not successful as determined by the resident QI team. To hone strategic focus in what should be reported, we also compared factors that might affect project outcomes. RESULTS: Out of 52 QI projects, 10 led to a change in routine practice ('adoption'). Details of project outcomes were limited. Project team outcomes, indicative of capacity building, were not systematically documented. Service user involvement, quality of measurement plan, fidelity of plan-do-study-act (PDSA) cycles had a major impact on adoption. CONCLUSION: Designing a routine reporting framework requires an iterative process to navigate data accrual demands. A retrospective evaluation, as in this study, can yield empirical insights to support development of QI governance, thereby honing the implementation science of QI in a healthcare organisation
Business · Corporate governance · Economics · Executive board · Executive summary · Geography · Management · Political science · Process management · Quality (philosophy) · Scale (ratio) · Service (business) · Service quality · Accounting · Finance · Health Policy Implementation Science · Healthcare Quality and Management · Marketing · Patient Safety and Medication Errors · Public Administration
How Big is a Big Odds Ratio? Interpreting the Magnitudes of Odds Ratios in Epidemiological Studies
Learning behaviours in the workplace
Systematic review of the application of the plan–do–study–act method to improve quality in healthcare
Redesigning mental health services
Optimizing patient involvement in quality improvement
Making it safe
Measuring Success for Health Care Quality Improvement Interventions
Taking the heat or taking the temperature? A qualitative study of a large-scale exercise in seeking to measure for improvement, not blame
| Citation velocity | historical |
|---|---|
| Highly cited | No |