Outcome monitoring to facilitate clinical governance; experience from a national programme in the independent sector

Abstract

Since 1998 BUPA has used the Short-Form 36 (SF-36) questionnaire to monitor changes in health status after adult elective surgery. Over 70 independent hospitals across the United Kingdom have collected data on over 100000 patient episodes. SF-36 is one of a number of tools that support clinical governance in the sector. Results are reported confidentially, putting the emphasis on supporting a learning culture. FORMULATION OF PROBLEMS APPARENT AT 3 YEARS: Feedback was sub-optimal: discussions with hospital staff and consultants revealed that the league tables were hard to interpret, and there was uncertainty about the definition of outlier results. The number of patients recruited to the survey was variable across the hospitals. No grouping of low-volume procedures met with agreement. ACTION PLAN FOR YEAR 4: Use 'Shewhart' control charts to distinguish common and special cause variation in results; substitute a condition-specific tool in one instance; adoption of an 'alert' process to prompt local audit of unusual results; use of a reminder letter to improve return rate of follow-up questionnaires; and focus programme on a list of 20 common procedures. Discuss these changes with the managerial and clinical leaders of each of BUPA's hospitals. CURRENT POSITION AT YEAR 5 : The use of Shewhart charts has been welcomed by managers and clinicians at BUPA's hospitals. The renewed confidence in the programme has encouraged constructive debate into allowing wider access to previously confidential results. Some changes in clinical practice have occurred.

Functionality and feedback: a realist synthesis of the collation, interpretation and utilisation of patient-reported outcome measures data to improve patient care

“…The private sector provider Bupa (now owned by Spire) pioneered the routine collection of PROMs data to monitor the outcomes of surgery some years before this initiative was introduced into the NHS. 124 Its then chief executive, Andrew Vallence-Owen, was interviewed for a British Medical Journal (BMJ) article 125 and argued that QI arose because surgeons competed with each other, not for patients, but for the professional prestige associated with having better outcomes than their peers: Doctors are quite competitive . .…”

Patient‐reported outcome measures in the NHS: new methods for analysing and reporting EQ‐5D data

“…For example, Bupa's experience (Vallance-Owen et al, 2004) demonstrates that the way that results are presented is an important aspect of their being able to be used in clinical governance. Data need to be presented in a manner that is informative, relevant and understandable by those who will use them, including patients and other decision makers.…”

The routine use of patient reported outcome measures in healthcare settings

“…This article, however, is aimed at individuals who are keen to use PROMs at a local level, who may have limited research experience or access to expertise and advice on relevant research methods, and who may be unaware of a number of pitfalls that could undermine their aim of ultimately producing useful, meaningful data. In addition, there are very few published examples of the application of PROMs in the context of clinical governance and quality assurance, 19 with this form of application being largely unevaluated. Evidence of the impact of using PROMs on routine practice is also lacking.…”