BMJ quality & safety
-
BMJ quality & safety · Apr 2014
ReviewSystematic review of the application of the plan-do-study-act method to improve quality in healthcare.
Plan-do-study-act (PDSA) cycles provide a structure for iterative testing of changes to improve quality of systems. The method is widely accepted in healthcare improvement; however there is little overarching evaluation of how the method is applied. This paper proposes a theoretical framework for assessing the quality of application of PDSA cycles and explores the consistency with which the method has been applied in peer-reviewed literature against this framework. ⋯ To progress the development of the science of improvement, a greater understanding of the use of improvement methods, including PDSA, is essential to draw reliable conclusions about their effectiveness. This would be supported by the development of systematic and rigorous standards for the application and reporting of PDSAs.
-
Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a common cause of preventable harm for hospitalised patients. Over the past decade, numerous intervention types have been implemented in attempts to improve the prescription of VTE prophylaxis in hospitals, with varying degrees of success. We reviewed key articles to assess the efficacy of different types of interventions to improve prescription of VTE prophylaxis for hospitalised patients. ⋯ Many intervention types have proven effective to different degrees in improving VTE prevention. Provider education is likely a required additional component and should be combined with other intervention types. Active mandatory tools are likely more effective than passive ones. Information technology tools that are well integrated into provider workflow, such as alerts and computerised clinical decision support, can improve best practice prophylaxis use and prevent patient harm resulting from VTE.
-
BMJ quality & safety · Dec 2013
ReviewDefining quality outcomes for complex-care patients transitioning across the continuum using a structured panel process.
No standardised set of quality measures associated with transitioning complex-care patients across the various healthcare settings and home exists. In this context, a structured panel process was used to define quality measures for care transitions involving complex-care patients across healthcare settings. ⋯ The five measures identified through this research may be useful as indicators of overall care quality related to care transitions involving complex-care patients across different healthcare settings. Further research efforts are called for to explore the applicability and feasibility of using the quality measures to drive quality improvement across the healthcare system.
-
BMJ quality & safety · Oct 2013
ReviewThe global burden of unsafe medical care: analytic modelling of observational studies.
To contextualise the degree of harm that comes from unsafe medical care compared with individual health conditions using the global burden of disease (GBD), a metric to determine how much suffering is caused by individual diseases. ⋯ This study provides early evidence that adverse events due to medical care represent a major source of morbidity and mortality globally. Though suffering related to the lack of access to care in many countries remains, these findings suggest the importance of critically evaluating the quality and safety of the care provided once a person accesses health services. While further refinements of the estimates are needed, these data should be a call to global health policymakers to make patient safety an international priority.
-
BMJ quality & safety · Oct 2013
ReviewUse of health information technology to reduce diagnostic errors.
Health information technology (HIT) systems have the potential to reduce delayed, missed or incorrect diagnoses. We describe and classify the current state of diagnostic HIT and identify future research directions. ⋯ Diagnostic HIT research is still in its early stages with few demonstrations of measurable clinical impact. Future efforts need to focus on: (1) improving methods and criteria for measurement of the diagnostic process using electronic data; (2) better usability and interfaces in electronic health records; (3) more meaningful incorporation of evidence-based diagnostic protocols within clinical workflows; and (4) systematic feedback of diagnostic performance.