Quality Improvement Practices in Academic Emergency Medicine: Perspectives from the Chairs

OBJECTIVE: To assess academic emergency medicine (EM) chairs’ perceptions of quality improvement (QI) training programs. METHODS: A voluntary anonymous 20 item survey was distributed to a sample of academic chairs of EM through the Association of Academic Chairs of Emergency Medicine. Data was collected to assess the percentage of academic emergency physicians who had received QI training, the type of training they received, their perception of the impact of this training on behavior, practice and outcomes, and any perceived barriers to implementing QI programs in the emergency department. RESULTS: The response rate to the survey was 69% (N = 59). 59.3% of respondents report that their hospital has a formal QI program for physicians. Chairs received training in a variety of QI programs. The type of QI program used by respondents was perceived as having no impact on goals achieved by QI (χ(2) = 12.382; p = 0.260), but there was a statistically significant (χ(2) = 14.383; p = 0.006) relationship between whether or not goals were achieved and academic EM chairs’ perceptions about return on investment for QI training. Only 22% of chairs responded that they have already made changes as a result of the QI training. 78.8% of EM chairs responded that quality programs could have a significant positive impact on their practice and the healthcare industry. Chairs perceived that QI programs had the most potential value in the areas of understanding and reducing medical errors and improving patient flow and throughput. Other areas of potential value of QI include improving specific clinical indicators and standardizing physician care. CONCLUSION: Academic EM chairs perceived that QI programs were an effective way to drive needed improvements. The results suggest that there is a high level of interest in QI but a low level of adoption of training and implementation.