Identifying continuous quality improvement publications: what makes an improvement intervention 'CQI'?
| Autor: | Susanne Hempel, Sean M. O'Neill, Lisa V. Rubenstein, Robbie Foy, Marjorie Danz, Yee-Wei Lim, Paul G. Shekelle, Marika J Suttorp |
|---|---|
| Rok vydání: | 2011 |
| Předmět: |
medicine.medical_specialty
Quality management organisation Information Storage and Retrieval Intervention (counseling) medicine Medical physics Operations management Screening instrument Continuous quality improvement Reliability (statistics) Original Research research Total quality management business.industry Health Policy Publications Term (time) Test (assessment) healthcare quality improvement PDSA Consensus development business Total Quality Management |
| Zdroj: | BMJ quality & safety |
| ISSN: | 2044-5423 2044-5415 |
| Popis: | Background: The term continuous quality improvement (CQI) is often used to refer to a method for improving care, but no consensus statement exists on the definition of CQI. Evidence reviews are critical for advancing science, and depend on reliable definitions for article selection. Methods: As a preliminary step towards improving CQI evidence reviews, this study aimed to use expert panel methods to identify key CQI definitional features and develop and test a screening instrument for reliably identifying articles with the key features. We used a previously published method to identify 106 articles meeting the general definition of a quality improvement intervention (QII) from 9427 electronically identified articles from PubMed. Two raters then applied a six-item CQI screen to the 106 articles. Results: Per cent agreement ranged from 55.7% to 75.5% for the six items, and reviewer-adjusted intra-class correlation ranged from 0.43 to 0.62. ‘Feedback of systematically collected data’ was the most common feature (64%), followed by being at least ‘somewhat’ adapted to local conditions (61%), feedback at meetings involving participant leaders (46%), using an iterative development process (40%), being at least ‘somewhat’ data driven (34%), and using a recognised change method (28%). All six features were present in 14.2% of QII articles. Conclusions: We conclude that CQI features can be extracted from QII articles with reasonable reliability, but only a small proportion of QII articles include all features. Further consensus development is needed to support meaningful use of the term CQI for scientific communication. |
| Databáze: | OpenAIRE |
| Externí odkaz: |
|