How, in what contexts, and why do quality dashboards lead to improvements in care quality in acute hospitals? Protocol for a realist feasibility evaluation.
Decision Support Systems, Clinical
/ organization & administration
Feasibility Studies
Hospital Bed Capacity
/ statistics & numerical data
Hospital Information Systems
/ organization & administration
Humans
Interrupted Time Series Analysis
Medical Records Systems, Computerized
/ organization & administration
Quality Improvement
/ organization & administration
audit
clinical audit
health informatics
qualitative research
quality in health care
Journal
BMJ open
ISSN: 2044-6055
Titre abrégé: BMJ Open
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101552874
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
25 02 2020
25 02 2020
Historique:
entrez:
28
2
2020
pubmed:
28
2
2020
medline:
17
2
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
National audits are used to monitor care quality and safety and are anticipated to reduce unexplained variations in quality by stimulating quality improvement (QI). However, variation within and between providers in the extent of engagement with national audits means that the potential for national audit data to inform QI is not being realised. This study will undertake a feasibility evaluation of QualDash, a quality dashboard designed to support clinical teams and managers to explore data from two national audits, the Myocardial Ischaemia National Audit Project (MINAP) and the Paediatric Intensive Care Audit Network (PICANet). Realist evaluation, which involves building, testing and refining theories of how an intervention works, provides an overall framework for this feasibility study. Realist hypotheses that describe how, in what contexts, and why QualDash is expected to provide benefit will be tested across five hospitals. A controlled interrupted time series analysis, using key MINAP and PICANet measures, will provide preliminary evidence of the impact of QualDash, while ethnographic observations and interviews over 12 months will provide initial insight into contexts and mechanisms that lead to those impacts. Feasibility outcomes include the extent to which MINAP and PICANet data are used, data completeness in the audits, and the extent to which participants perceive QualDash to be useful and express the intention to continue using it after the study period. The study has been approved by the University of Leeds School of Healthcare Research Ethics Committee. Study results will provide an initial understanding of how, in what contexts, and why quality dashboards lead to improvements in care quality. These will be disseminated to academic audiences, study participants, hospital IT departments and national audits. If the results show a trial is feasible, we will disseminate the QualDash software through a stepped wedge cluster randomised trial.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32102812
pii: bmjopen-2019-033208
doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2019-033208
pmc: PMC7044920
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
e033208Subventions
Organisme : Department of Health
ID : 16/04/06
Pays : United Kingdom
Organisme : Department of Health
ID : HS&DR/16/04/06
Pays : United Kingdom
Informations de copyright
© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2020. Re-use permitted under CC BY. Published by BMJ.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
Competing interests: CG is a member of the MINAP Academic and Steering Groups. RF is the principal investigator for PICANet and RP was previously Principal Investigator for PICANet.
Références
BMJ Qual Saf. 2018 Dec;27(12):1000-1007
pubmed: 29950323
Sociol Health Illn. 2005 Sep;27(6):855-71
pubmed: 16283902
IEEE Trans Vis Comput Graph. 2013 Dec;19(12):2376-85
pubmed: 24051804
Soc Sci Med. 2018 Jun;206:100-109
pubmed: 29727779
BMC Med Res Methodol. 2010 Jan 06;10:1
pubmed: 20053272
Crit Care Med. 2017 Jun;45(6):1045-1053
pubmed: 28328654
Annu Rev Public Health. 2018 Apr 1;39:5-25
pubmed: 29328873
Evaluation (Lond). 2016 Jul;22(3):286-303
pubmed: 27478401
Soc Sci Med. 2009 Dec;69(12):1767-76
pubmed: 19854551
J Gen Intern Med. 2014 Nov;29(11):1534-41
pubmed: 24965281
BMC Med. 2016 Jun 24;14(1):96
pubmed: 27342217
Milbank Q. 2011 Jun;89(2):167-205
pubmed: 21676020
BMJ Qual Saf. 2015 Mar;24(3):228-38
pubmed: 25616279
Implement Sci. 2015 Apr 16;10:49
pubmed: 25885787
J Biomed Inform. 2010 Feb;43(1):159-72
pubmed: 19615467
BMC Med. 2011 Apr 27;9:45
pubmed: 21521535
Trials. 2013 Oct 25;14:353
pubmed: 24160371
BMJ Qual Saf. 2018 Jun;27(6):425-436
pubmed: 29175856
Milbank Q. 2009 Jun;87(2):391-416
pubmed: 19523123
Int J Med Inform. 2017 Jan;97:98-108
pubmed: 27919400
BMC Health Serv Res. 2005 Jul 13;5:50
pubmed: 16011811
J Clin Psychol. 2005 Feb;61(2):145-53
pubmed: 15609360
Implement Sci. 2014 Jan 17;9:14
pubmed: 24438584
Qual Saf Health Care. 2002 Sep;11(3):270-5
pubmed: 12486994
Milbank Q. 2007;85(1):93-138
pubmed: 17319808
J Health Serv Res Policy. 2016 Apr;21(2):91-100
pubmed: 26811374
Int J Med Inform. 2015 Feb;84(2):87-100
pubmed: 25453274
IEEE Trans Vis Comput Graph. 2018 May;24(5):1728-1741
pubmed: 28320668
Heart. 2007 Jun;93(6):744-8
pubmed: 17237128
Heart. 2004 Sep;90(9):1004-9
pubmed: 15310686
Eur Heart J Acute Cardiovasc Care. 2013 Mar;2(1):9-18
pubmed: 24062929
Implement Sci. 2006 Apr 28;1:9
pubmed: 16722539
Med Care. 2015 Aug;53(8):686-91
pubmed: 26172938
Sociol Health Illn. 2007 Mar;29(2):163-79
pubmed: 17381811
BMJ Qual Saf. 2014 Feb;23(2):136-46
pubmed: 24029440
Health Aff (Millwood). 1999 Nov-Dec;18(6):233-7
pubmed: 10650707