Implementation of quality indicators: barriers and facilitators

117
Implementation of quality Implementation of quality indicators: barriers and indicators: barriers and facilitators facilitators Peter HJ van der Voort, MD, PhD, MSc Dept of intensive care Onze Lieve Vrouwe Gasthuis Amsterdam, The Netherlands

description

Implementation of quality indicators: barriers and facilitators. Peter HJ van der Voort, MD, PhD, MSc Dept of intensive care Onze Lieve Vrouwe Gasthuis Amsterdam, The Netherlands. Content. Indicators and quality improvement The Dutch Intensive Care Registry Barriers to implementation of QI - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Transcript of Implementation of quality indicators: barriers and facilitators

Page 1: Implementation of quality indicators: barriers and facilitators

Implementation of quality indicators: Implementation of quality indicators: barriers and facilitatorsbarriers and facilitators

Peter HJ van der Voort, MD, PhD, MSc

Dept of intensive care

Onze Lieve Vrouwe Gasthuis

Amsterdam, The Netherlands

Page 2: Implementation of quality indicators: barriers and facilitators
Page 3: Implementation of quality indicators: barriers and facilitators
Page 4: Implementation of quality indicators: barriers and facilitators

ContentContent

• Indicators and quality improvement

• The Dutch Intensive Care Registry

• Barriers to implementation of QI

• Facilitators

• Implementation strategies

• From indicator to improvement of care– InFoQi study with the Dutch indicator set

Page 5: Implementation of quality indicators: barriers and facilitators
Page 6: Implementation of quality indicators: barriers and facilitators

Dutch National Intensive Care Dutch National Intensive Care Registry (NICE)Registry (NICE)

Page 7: Implementation of quality indicators: barriers and facilitators

Benchmark of outcome

• SMR

• length of stay

Page 8: Implementation of quality indicators: barriers and facilitators

Benchmark of outcome

• SMR

• length of stay

• How to improve?

Page 9: Implementation of quality indicators: barriers and facilitators

Dutch Society of Intensive CareDutch Society of Intensive Care

• 2003-2004 development of an indicator set to analyse quality of care

• Based on quality domains of IOM

Page 10: Implementation of quality indicators: barriers and facilitators

National Guideline On Intensive National Guideline On Intensive Care OrganisationCare Organisation

• 1993, revised 2005, implemented 2006

• Section on quality improvement:

• Quality Indicator set NVIC incorporated in guideline

• No indicators to follow implementation of the guideline

Page 11: Implementation of quality indicators: barriers and facilitators

* Indicators

How to use Quality IndicatorsHow to use Quality Indicators

Page 12: Implementation of quality indicators: barriers and facilitators

• E.g. 2006 Guideline on organisation advises to have regional partners for collaboration (volume – outcome relation). To discuss individual patients.

• Indicator: % patients discussed from total admitted

Page 13: Implementation of quality indicators: barriers and facilitators

How to use Quality IndicatorsHow to use Quality Indicators

Page 14: Implementation of quality indicators: barriers and facilitators
Page 15: Implementation of quality indicators: barriers and facilitators

The Dutch Quality Indicator SetThe Dutch Quality Indicator Set

• Cooperation between NICE and NVIC

• Set developed by NVIC

• Benchmark by NICE

• Pilot: registration workload, definitions

• Active promotion to Dutch ICU’s

Page 16: Implementation of quality indicators: barriers and facilitators

Implementation of the indicator set appeared to be a QI plan by itself

Page 17: Implementation of quality indicators: barriers and facilitators

Implementation of the indicator set appeared to be a QI plan by itself

Problems– Create the sense of urgency to use indicators– How to implement the registration of

indicators– How to feed-back– How to make conclusions– How to implement changes

Page 18: Implementation of quality indicators: barriers and facilitators

Definition of quality

indicators

AIRE

Quality Domains

AdoptionDiffusion

Dissemination

Page 19: Implementation of quality indicators: barriers and facilitators

• Purpose, relevance and organisation where the indicator appoints to

• Involvement of professionals• Scientific evidence• Additional reasoning and use

Page 20: Implementation of quality indicators: barriers and facilitators

Definition of quality

indicators

AIRE

Quality Domains

PDSA

Page 21: Implementation of quality indicators: barriers and facilitators
Page 22: Implementation of quality indicators: barriers and facilitators
Page 23: Implementation of quality indicators: barriers and facilitators

Avedis Donabedian 1919-2000

o Structure:o Organisation, resources and equipment

o Process:o Process of care between caregiver and patient

o Outcomeo Results (at patient level)

Page 24: Implementation of quality indicators: barriers and facilitators

Dutch indicators - internalDutch indicators - internal•Availability of intensivists

•Nurse to patient ratio

•Policy to prevent medication errors

•Registration of patient- and family satisfaction

Structure

Process •Length of stay in the ICU

•Duration of ventilation

•Number of days with 100% beds occupied

•Glucose regulationOutcome•Mortality•Incidence of pressure sores•Unplanned extubation

Page 25: Implementation of quality indicators: barriers and facilitators

Definition of quality

indicators

AIRE

Quality Domains

PDSA

Page 26: Implementation of quality indicators: barriers and facilitators

Decision to use a set of indicators

Organize and implement registration of data

Data validity

Data export

Analysis and benchmark (NICE)

Feedback

Interpretation and conclusion

Plan for change

Implementation of changes / new methods

Page 27: Implementation of quality indicators: barriers and facilitators

Barriers on all levels

Page 28: Implementation of quality indicators: barriers and facilitators

Decision to use a set of indicators– Sense of urgency– Intrinsic motivation to improve– Legislation– Hospital directors– Society of Intensive Care– Convince that using indicators

improve care

What we did:

Inform, offer tools

Page 29: Implementation of quality indicators: barriers and facilitators

Decision to use a set of indicators

Organize and implement registration of data

Data validity

Data export

Analysis and benchmark (NICE)

Feedback

Interpretation and conclusion

Plan for change

Implementation of changes / new methods

Page 30: Implementation of quality indicators: barriers and facilitators

• Intervention study: InFoQi to improve QI using indicators

• 3 interventions:– Extensive feedback– QI team– Educational Outreach

Page 31: Implementation of quality indicators: barriers and facilitators

• To develop an optimal intervention– Literature search on optimal feedback– Search for barriers in literature, expert

groups, questionnaire

Page 32: Implementation of quality indicators: barriers and facilitators

Definition of quality

indicators

AIRE

Quality Domains

PDSA

Page 33: Implementation of quality indicators: barriers and facilitators

Implementation strategiesImplementation strategiesusing indicator datausing indicator data

Educational meetingEducational outreachAudit and feedbackDevelopment of a quality improvement planFinancial incentives

Supporting activities:– Distribution of educational material– Use of a local opinion leader– Development of a quality improvement team

Page 34: Implementation of quality indicators: barriers and facilitators

Educational meetingEducational meeting

Participation in conferences, seminars, lectures, workshops or training sessions.

During these meetings, feedback of quality indicators is presented, and study participants discuss how to improve performance.

Page 35: Implementation of quality indicators: barriers and facilitators

Educational outreachEducational outreach

A trained independent person or investigator meets with health professionals or managers in their practice setting to provide information (e.g. feedback of quality indicators).

Page 36: Implementation of quality indicators: barriers and facilitators

Development of a quality Development of a quality improvement planimprovement plan

A plan based on indicator data to be used to improve the quality of care.

Page 37: Implementation of quality indicators: barriers and facilitators

Financial incentivesFinancial incentives

Rewarding individual health professionals or institutions with higher payments when they improve performance.

Page 38: Implementation of quality indicators: barriers and facilitators

Audit and feedbackAudit and feedback

Giving a report, including a summary of clinical performance over a specified period of time.

Page 39: Implementation of quality indicators: barriers and facilitators

“any summary of clinical performance over a specified period of time”

Page 40: Implementation of quality indicators: barriers and facilitators

“It is striking how little can be discerned about the effects of audit and feedback based on the 118 trials included in this review.”

“Low baseline compliance with recommended practice and higher intensity of audit and feedback were associated with larger adjusted risk ratios (greater effectiveness) across studies.”

Page 41: Implementation of quality indicators: barriers and facilitators

Feedback of analysed data

Page 42: Implementation of quality indicators: barriers and facilitators

• Jamtvedt et al. reviewed information feedback based on any health care data source, while we focused on feedback based on data from medical registries

• we aimed to include not only RCTs, but any peer-reviewed paper on information feedback within the context of a medical registry. Furthermore, where Jamtvedt et al. only reported on the effectiveness of information feedback, we also aimed to identify the barriers and success factors to this effectiveness as reported in the literature

Page 43: Implementation of quality indicators: barriers and facilitators

• 53 papers; 50 feedback initiatives• 24 analytic papers for 22 studies evaluating the

effect of a feedback method on one (n=8) or more (n = 14) primary, clinical outcome measures

• Positive effect on all outcome measures: 4 • Mix of positive and no effects: 8• 10 not any effect. • None of the 22 studies reported a negative

effect.

Page 44: Implementation of quality indicators: barriers and facilitators

MFA = multifaceted approach

Page 45: Implementation of quality indicators: barriers and facilitators

“To review the literature concerning strategies for implementing quality indicators in hospital care, and their effectiveness in improving the quality of care”

Page 46: Implementation of quality indicators: barriers and facilitators

• 21 studies (9 RCT, 2 CCT and 10 B-A)• 17 US; 14 cardiovascular care• 1-379 participating hospitals

• Indicators and hospital care• 20 on process care• 6 on patient outcomes• Follow up 6 months

de Vos et al. Int J Qual Health Care 2008;1-11

Page 47: Implementation of quality indicators: barriers and facilitators

de Vos et al. Int J Qual Health Care 2008;1-11

Page 48: Implementation of quality indicators: barriers and facilitators

• Study design unrelated to effectiveness

• Results on outcomes: – 4 studies indicators ineffective– 1 partially effective– 1 effective

Effective: > 50% sign improvement; partially effective: +/- 50% improvement; ineffective: <50% improvement

de Vos et al. Int J Qual Health Care 2008;1-11

Page 49: Implementation of quality indicators: barriers and facilitators

• Results on process:– 20 studies

– 3 no significant improvement at all– 8 improvement in some– 7 partially effective– 2 significant improvement in all process

indicators

Most are effective on process of carede Vos et al. Int J Qual Health Care 2008;1-11

Page 50: Implementation of quality indicators: barriers and facilitators

de Vos et al. Int J Qual Health Care 2008;1-11

Page 51: Implementation of quality indicators: barriers and facilitators

Successful implementation of Successful implementation of indicatorsindicators

Feedback reports combined with

Educational implementation strategy

and/or Quality Improvement plan

de Vos et al. Int J Qual Health Care 2008;1-11

Page 52: Implementation of quality indicators: barriers and facilitators

BarriersBarriers

Barriers should be identified before an implementation strategy is launched

Page 53: Implementation of quality indicators: barriers and facilitators

Facilitating factorsFacilitating factors

• Supportive / collaborative management

• Administration support

• Detailed and credible data feedback

• Ability of persons receiving feedback to act on it

Page 54: Implementation of quality indicators: barriers and facilitators

ICU

Page 55: Implementation of quality indicators: barriers and facilitators
Page 56: Implementation of quality indicators: barriers and facilitators
Page 57: Implementation of quality indicators: barriers and facilitators
Page 58: Implementation of quality indicators: barriers and facilitators

Barriers “knowledge”:

Factors limiting adherence through a cognitive component

Page 59: Implementation of quality indicators: barriers and facilitators

Barriers “attitude”:

Factors limiting adherence through an affective component

Page 60: Implementation of quality indicators: barriers and facilitators

Barriers “behavior”

Factors limiting adherence through a restriction of physician ability

Page 61: Implementation of quality indicators: barriers and facilitators
Page 62: Implementation of quality indicators: barriers and facilitators
Page 63: Implementation of quality indicators: barriers and facilitators
Page 64: Implementation of quality indicators: barriers and facilitators

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

11) Monitoring of quality indicators does not take too much time (n=139)

10) Monitoring of quality indicators can be done without huge investments (n=140)

9) Monitoring of quality indicators fits into the daily routines in the hospital setting (n=140)

8) Monitoring of quality indicators leads to reliable benchmark data for ICUs (n=140)

7) Monitoring of quality indicators stimulates quality improvement (n=140)

6) Feedback on quality indicators stimulates me to adjust my practice (n=142)

5) I am willing to implement quality indicators in daily practice (n=141)

4) In general, I do not offer resistance towards working with quality indicators (n=142)

3) I understand the importance of using quality indicators (n=142)

2) I am familiar with the Dutch set of ICU quality indicators (n=142)

1) I am familiar with the use of quality indicators as a tool to improve quality of care (n= 142)

Proportion of responding respondents

Strongly disagree

Disagree

Neutral

Agree

Strongly agree

Page 65: Implementation of quality indicators: barriers and facilitators

Barrier 1 of 15Barrier 1 of 15

Barrier 1 How the barrier is targeted by the feedback intervention

Lack of knowledge on how to interpret the data

“people are not being taught how to handle the results, how to interpret them.”

Page 66: Implementation of quality indicators: barriers and facilitators

Barrier 1 of 15Barrier 1 of 15

Barrier 1 How the barrier is targeted by the feedback intervention

Lack of knowledge on how to interpret the data

During educational outreach visits the facilitators support the QI team in interpreting their performance data in the reports and in formulating a QI action plan

“people are not being taught how to handle the results, how to interpret them.”

Page 67: Implementation of quality indicators: barriers and facilitators

Barrier 2 of 15Barrier 2 of 15

Barrier 2 How the barrier is targeted by the feedback intervention

Lack of information to initiate QI actions

“You want to improve the quality, but you don’t know where to start or where the real problems lie”

Page 68: Implementation of quality indicators: barriers and facilitators

Barrier 2 of 15Barrier 2 of 15

Barrier 2 How the barrier is targeted by the feedback intervention

Lack of information to initiate QI actions

The feedback reports contain extended information on six of the indicators; During educational outreach visits the facilitators support the QI team in further exploration of data in the NICE registry

“You want to improve the quality, but you don’t know where to start or where the real problems lie”

Page 69: Implementation of quality indicators: barriers and facilitators

Barrier 3 of 15Barrier 3 of 15

Barrier 3 How the barrier is targeted by the feedback intervention

Lack of trust in data

“The data are often regarded as unreliable. If you put rubbish in, you will only get rubbish out. Trust in

the data is essential.”

Page 70: Implementation of quality indicators: barriers and facilitators

Barrier 3 of 15Barrier 3 of 15

Barrier 3 How the barrier is targeted by the feedback intervention

Lack of trust in data During educational outreach visits the facilitators discuss with the QI team completeness and correctness of the data sent to the NICE registry and -if necessary- support them in formulating actions to improve their data quality.

“The data are often regarded as unreliable. If you put rubbish in, you will only get rubbish out. Trust in

the data is essential.”

Page 71: Implementation of quality indicators: barriers and facilitators

Barrier 4 of 15Barrier 4 of 15

Barrier 4 How the barrier is targeted by the feedback intervention

Lack of statistical power for small ICUs

Not targeted by the intervention

“small number of patients lead to broad confidence intervals”

Page 72: Implementation of quality indicators: barriers and facilitators

Barrier 5 of 15Barrier 5 of 15

Barrier 5 How the barrier is targeted by the feedback intervention

Lack of case-mix correction

“the ‘my patients are sicker’ syndrome.”

Page 73: Implementation of quality indicators: barriers and facilitators

Barrier 5 of 15Barrier 5 of 15

Barrier 5 How the barrier is targeted by the feedback intervention

Lack of case-mix correction Besides already available case-mix corrected hospital mortality data, data are stratified based on admission type or on APACHE IV diagnosis. During educational outreach visits the facilitators support the QI team in formulating additional case-mix related analyses on data in the NICE registry

“the ‘my patients are sicker’ syndrome.”

Page 74: Implementation of quality indicators: barriers and facilitators

Barrier 6 of 15Barrier 6 of 15

Barrier 6 How the barrier is targeted by the feedback intervention

Level of aggregation too high

“the care providers need data at practice level, not only at the organisation level.”

Page 75: Implementation of quality indicators: barriers and facilitators

Barrier 6 of 15Barrier 6 of 15

Barrier 6 How the barrier is targeted by the feedback intervention

Level of aggregation too high Besides data aggregated on ICU level, the feedback reports contain data on patient or shift level for six of the indicators.

“the care providers need data at practice level, not only at the organisation level.”

Page 76: Implementation of quality indicators: barriers and facilitators

Barrier 7 of 15Barrier 7 of 15

Barrier 7 How the barrier is targeted by the feedback intervention

Insufficient timeliness

“…the information might not have been presented close enough to the time of decision making.”

Page 77: Implementation of quality indicators: barriers and facilitators

Barrier 7 of 15Barrier 7 of 15

Barrier 7 How the barrier is targeted by the feedback intervention

Insufficient timeliness As the monthly reports do not contain comparisons with other ICUs, it is possible to decrease the time between the end of a period and reporting data on this period from ten (for quarterly reports ) to six weeks (for monthly reports).

“…the information might not have been presented close enough to the time of decision making.”

Page 78: Implementation of quality indicators: barriers and facilitators

Barrier 8 of 15Barrier 8 of 15

Barrier 8 How the barrier is targeted by the feedback intervention

Lack of intensity

“…the care providers received prescriber feedback letters only once.”

Page 79: Implementation of quality indicators: barriers and facilitators

Barrier 8 of 15Barrier 8 of 15

Barrier 8 How the barrier is targeted by the feedback intervention

Lack of intensity In addition to the quarterly reports, the QI team receives monthly feedback reports containing their performance data presented in a different way.

“…the care providers received prescriber feedback letters only once.”

Page 80: Implementation of quality indicators: barriers and facilitators

Barrier 9 of 15Barrier 9 of 15

Barrier 9 How the barrier is targeted by the feedback intervention

Lack of outcome expectancy

“…the current rates were not considered a problem.”

Page 81: Implementation of quality indicators: barriers and facilitators

Barrier 9 of 15Barrier 9 of 15

Barrier 9 How the barrier is targeted by the feedback intervention

Lack of outcome expectancy During educational outreach visits the facilitators discuss with the QI team the opportunities for improvement

“…the current rates were not considered a problem.”

Page 82: Implementation of quality indicators: barriers and facilitators

Barrier 10 of 15Barrier 10 of 15

Barrier 10 How the barrier is targeted by the feedback intervention

Lack of trust in QI principles

“It is difficult to convince staff to use continuous quality improvement principles.”

Page 83: Implementation of quality indicators: barriers and facilitators

Barrier 10 of 15Barrier 10 of 15

Barrier 10 How the barrier is targeted by the feedback intervention

Lack of trust in QI principles The facilitators discuss with the QI team members the principles of systematic QI during the educational outreach visits.

“It is difficult to convince staff to use continuous quality improvement principles.”

Page 84: Implementation of quality indicators: barriers and facilitators

Barrier 11 of 15Barrier 11 of 15

Barrier 11 How the barrier is targeted by the feedback intervention

Lack of dissemination of information

“…inadequate dissemination within the hospitals.”

Page 85: Implementation of quality indicators: barriers and facilitators

Barrier 11 of 15Barrier 11 of 15

Barrier 11 How the barrier is targeted by the feedback intervention

Lack of dissemination of information Each QI team member receives the feedback reports by e-mail. During educational outreach visits and in monthly reminders they are encouraged to share their findings with the rest of the staff

“…inadequate dissemination within the hospitals.”

Page 86: Implementation of quality indicators: barriers and facilitators

Barrier 12 of 15Barrier 12 of 15

Barrier 12 How the barrier is targeted by the feedback intervention

Lack of motivation

“As the intervention was unsolicited, the participants had not agreed to review their practice.”

Page 87: Implementation of quality indicators: barriers and facilitators

Barrier 12 of 15Barrier 12 of 15

Barrier 12 How the barrier is targeted by the feedback intervention

Lack of motivation The members of the QI team should be selected based on their affinity and experience with measuring and improving quality of care and their capability to convince staff to be involved in QI activities

“As the intervention was unsolicited, the participants had not agreed to review their practice.”

Page 88: Implementation of quality indicators: barriers and facilitators

Barrier 13 of 15Barrier 13 of 15Barrier 13 How the barrier is targeted by the

feedback intervention

Organizational constraints

“Patient care is the main task and [QI activities are] just an extra”

“You will need a change of organizational culture…That will take some time to achieve.”

Page 89: Implementation of quality indicators: barriers and facilitators

Barrier 13 of 15Barrier 13 of 15Barrier 13 How the barrier is targeted by the

feedback intervention

Organizational constraints The QI team forms the organizational basis for monitoring performance and initiating QI activities. One of their tasks is formulating a QI action plan corresponding with the opportunities for improvement within their own organization. They are also asked to discuss their performance during monthly QI team meetings, using the available reports and their QI plan as a basis. They are encouraged to report their findings during regular existing staff meetings.

“Patient care is the main task and [QI activities are] just an extra”

Page 90: Implementation of quality indicators: barriers and facilitators

Barrier 14 of 15Barrier 14 of 15

Barrier 14 How the barrier is targeted by the feedback intervention

Lack of resources Not targeted by the intervention

“Monitoring of quality indicators takes too much time and money”

Page 91: Implementation of quality indicators: barriers and facilitators

Barrier 15 of 15Barrier 15 of 15

Barrier 15 How the barrier is targeted by the feedback intervention

External barriers Not targeted by the intervention

“…there is [a lack of] public awareness now of the need to [improve the quality of care]”

Page 92: Implementation of quality indicators: barriers and facilitators

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Opinion leader (n=140)

Quality improvement team (n=140)

Education (n=140)

Reminders for registration (n=140)

Receiving feedback (n=140)

Administrative support (n=141)

Possibilities to improve care (n=141)

Social pressure from hospital management (n=140)

Social demand for transparency (n=140)

Encouragement from scientific society (n=137)

Intrinsic motivation (n=140)

Pay-for-performance (n=138)

Rules and policy (n=140)

Proportion of responding respondents

Strongly disagree

Disagree

Neutral

Agree

Strongly agree

Page 93: Implementation of quality indicators: barriers and facilitators

Determinants of facilitating Determinants of facilitating factorsfactors

• Administrative support p=0.02 (physicians)

• Education p=0.01 (nurses)

• Feedback p=0.001 (managers)

• Opportunities to improve care p=0.003 (physicians)

Page 94: Implementation of quality indicators: barriers and facilitators

Additional facilitatorsAdditional facilitators

• Patient Data Management System / user friendly software

• Appointment of a Quality Manager

• Appointment of one person responsible for coordination

Page 95: Implementation of quality indicators: barriers and facilitators

DeterminantsDeterminants• Of knowledge:

– Being manager > health care prof (p=0.004)

– Intensivists > nurses (p=0.01)

– 40-49 yr

– Academic/teaching hosp > non-teaching

• Of attitude

– No significant differences

• Of behaviour

– >49 yr pos related to overall behaviour

– Non teaching neg related

Page 96: Implementation of quality indicators: barriers and facilitators
Page 97: Implementation of quality indicators: barriers and facilitators

Definition of quality

indicators

AIRE

Quality Domains

PDSA

Page 98: Implementation of quality indicators: barriers and facilitators

Decision to use a set of indicators

Organize and implement registration of data

Data validity

Data export

Analysis (NICE)

Feedback

Interpretation and conclusion

Plan for change

Implementation of changes / new methods

Page 99: Implementation of quality indicators: barriers and facilitators

• Intervention study: InFoQi to improve QI using indicators

• 3 interventions on identified barriers:– Extensive feedback– QI team– Educational Outreach

Page 100: Implementation of quality indicators: barriers and facilitators

• Multicenter cluster randomised trial

• From October 2008 – October 2010

• 30 ICU’s

Page 101: Implementation of quality indicators: barriers and facilitators
Page 102: Implementation of quality indicators: barriers and facilitators

Definition of quality

indicators

AIRE

Quality Domains

PDSA

Page 103: Implementation of quality indicators: barriers and facilitators

Conclusions (1)Conclusions (1)Quality Indicators should meet strict criteria

The implementation of Quality Indicators should follow the PDSA cycle

The effect of implementation of QI has not been studied in ICU’s

Page 104: Implementation of quality indicators: barriers and facilitators

Conclusions (2)Conclusions (2)

To achieve effect a multifaceted

approach is needed

based on pre-defined barriers

Page 105: Implementation of quality indicators: barriers and facilitators

Nicolette de Keizer Gert Westert Nice participants

Sabine vd VeerMaartje de Vos

Page 106: Implementation of quality indicators: barriers and facilitators
Page 107: Implementation of quality indicators: barriers and facilitators

• Implementation policy– National– Hospital– ICU

• Support• QI implementation team

– multidisciplinary

Implementation of indicators

Page 108: Implementation of quality indicators: barriers and facilitators

Decision to use a set of indicators

Organize and implement registration of data

Data validity

Data export

Analysis and benchmark (NICE)

Feedback

Interpretation and conclusion

Plan for change

Implementation of changes / new methods

Page 109: Implementation of quality indicators: barriers and facilitators

• Who– distribute

• When– Part of the care process– Daily workflow– Responsibility

• How– Paper / PDMS

Registration of raw data

• Complete

• Reliable

• Validation

Page 110: Implementation of quality indicators: barriers and facilitators

Registration pitfallsRegistration pitfalls

• Definitions– NICE datadictionary

• Erroneous measurements– Room temp

• Inappropriate data collected– Wrong time period

• Extractions to export file– Default values

Page 111: Implementation of quality indicators: barriers and facilitators

• Decision to use a set of indicators• Organize and implement registration of data

• Responsible persons for parts of the registration on daily basis

• Overall responsibility for one person

• Data validity– Data quality checks every year locally– Data quality reports monthly

• Data export– We do not offer a ICT tool for export– Close collaboration with providers

Page 112: Implementation of quality indicators: barriers and facilitators

• Decision to use a set of indicators

• Organize and implement registration of data

• Data validity

• Data export

• Analysis (NICE)– Clinical Information Department in an

academic hospital

Page 113: Implementation of quality indicators: barriers and facilitators

• Decision to use a set of indicators

• Organize and implement registration of data

• Data validity

• Data export

• Analysis (NICE)

• Feedback

Page 114: Implementation of quality indicators: barriers and facilitators

Studies on barriers?Studies on barriers?

Page 115: Implementation of quality indicators: barriers and facilitators

Problems in: • gathering support

• personnel, management• disseminating information• registration / technical / political problems

Page 116: Implementation of quality indicators: barriers and facilitators

“% of hospital staff and % of senior managers participating in formally organized QI teams are associated with better values on quality indicators. Percentage of physicians participating in QI teams is not associated with better values”

Page 117: Implementation of quality indicators: barriers and facilitators

“41% felt that monitoring programs did not assist them in improving care. Providers cited numerous barriers to improving care processes.”

Am J Psychiatry 2004; 161:146–153