Domains associated with successful quality improvement in healthcare – a nationwide case study

Abstract

BackgroundThere is a distinct difference between what we know and what we do in healthcare: a gap that is impairing the quality of the care and increasing the costs. Quality improvement efforts have been made worldwide by learning collaboratives, based on recognized continual improvement theory with limited scientific evidence. The present study of 132 quality improvement projects in Norway explores the conditions for improvement from the perspectives of the frontline healthcare professionals, and evaluates the effectiveness of the continual improvement method.MethodsAn instrument with 25 questions was developed on prior focus group interviews with improvement project members who identified features that may promote or inhibit improvement. The questionnaire was sent to 189 improvement projects initiated by the Norwegian Medical Association, and responded by 70% (132) of the improvement teams. A sub study of their final reports by a validated instrument, made us able to identify the successful projects and compare their assessments with the assessments of the other projects. A factor analysis with Varimax rotation of the 25 questions identified five domains. A multivariate regression analysis was used to evaluate the association with successful quality improvements.ResultsTwo of the five domains were associated with success: Measurement and Guidance (p = 0.011), and Professional environment (p = 0.015). The organizational leadership domain was not associated with successful quality improvements (p = 0.26).ConclusionOur findings suggest that quality improvement projects with good guidance and focus on measurement for improvement have increased likelihood of success. The variables in these two domains are aligned with improvement theory and confirm the effectiveness of the continual improvement method provided by the learning collaborative. High performing professional environments successfully engaged in patient-centered quality improvement if they had access to: (a) knowledge of best practice provided by professional subject matter experts, (b) knowledge of current practice provided by simple measurement methods, assisted by (c) improvement knowledge experts who provided useful guidance on measurement, and made the team able to organize the improvement efforts well in spite of the difficult resource situation (time and personnel). Our findings may be used by healthcare organizations to develop effective infrastructure to support improvement and to create the conditions for making quality and safety improvement a part of everyone’s job.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12913-017-2454-2) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Evaluation of the Collaborative Use of an Evidence-Based Care Bundle in Emergency Laparotomy

“… 33 , 34 The Michigan Surgical Quality Collaborative has demonstrated this very effectively. 35 The use of frequent and timely data feedback has been shown to be a good indicator of successful QI initiatives. 36 Highlighting and providing data to clinicians in an accessible manner to show their performance against peers, as was done using our dashboard, has also been shown to improve performance.…”

Local emergency medical response after a terrorist attack in Norway: a qualitative study

“…65 The tactical management build their management on trust and empowerment of the teams 12 55 61. Systematic training of interprofessional communication crew resource management (CRM),66 decision-making and operative management skills are performed in their own context.…”

Organizational Support in Healthcare Redesign Education: A Mixed-Methods Exploratory Study of Expert Coach and Executive Sponsor Experiences

“…The NSW health system has significantly invested in healthcare redesign capacity building by incorporating the essential roles of expert coaches and executive sponsors within the project components of the redesign course. This is in contrast to many healthcare organizations that do not possess a basic infrastructure to support quality improvement [ 24 ]. It was a positive finding that, as key stakeholders, this group’s overall levels of satisfaction with the course were high, and more importantly, that most agreed that the course had made a valuable contribution to their organization.…”

“…Previously, the experiences of expert quality improvement coaches and executive sponsors have received little attention [ 24 ], despite evidence that coaching and sponsorship contribute to effective interventions and thereby improve health services, leading to better care [ 25 , 27 ]. Little is known about the experience of these important professionals and how their roles are enacted within healthcare organizations.…”