Cargando…

Improving quality of care through improved audit and feedback

BACKGROUND: The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) has led the industry in measuring facility performance as a critical element in improving quality of care, investing substantial resources to develop and maintain valid and cost-effective measures. The External Peer Review Program (EPRP) of the VA...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Hysong, Sylvia J, Teal, Cayla R, Khan, Myrna J, Haidet, Paul
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2012
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3462705/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22607640
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1748-5908-7-45
_version_ 1782245195664850944
author Hysong, Sylvia J
Teal, Cayla R
Khan, Myrna J
Haidet, Paul
author_facet Hysong, Sylvia J
Teal, Cayla R
Khan, Myrna J
Haidet, Paul
author_sort Hysong, Sylvia J
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) has led the industry in measuring facility performance as a critical element in improving quality of care, investing substantial resources to develop and maintain valid and cost-effective measures. The External Peer Review Program (EPRP) of the VA is the official data source for monitoring facility performance, used to prioritize the quality areas needing most attention. Facility performance measurement has significantly improved preventive and chronic care, as well as overall quality; however, much variability still exists in levels of performance across measures and facilities. Audit and feedback (A&F), an important component of effective performance measurement, can help reduce this variability and improve overall performance. Previous research suggests that VA Medical Centers (VAMCs) with high EPRP performance scores tend to use EPRP data as a feedback source. However, the manner in which EPRP data are used as a feedback source by individual providers as well as service line, facility, and network leadership is not well understood. An in-depth understanding of mental models, strategies, and specific feedback process characteristics adopted by high-performing facilities is thus urgently needed. This research compares how leaders of high, low, and moderately performing VAMCs use clinical performance data from the EPRP as a feedback tool to maintain and improve quality of care. METHODS: We will conduct a qualitative, grounded theory analysis of up to 64 interviews using a novel method of sampling primary care, facility, and Veterans Integrated Service Network (VISN) leadership at high-, moderate-, and low-performing facilities. We will analyze interviews for evidence of cross-facility differences in perceptions of performance data usefulness and strategies for disseminating performance data evaluating performance, with particular attention to timeliness, individualization, and punitiveness of feedback delivery. DISCUSSION: Most research examining feedback to improve provider and facility performance lacks a detailed understanding of the elements of effective feedback. This research will highlight the elements most commonly used at high-performing facilities and identify additional features of their successful feedback strategies not previously identified. Armed with this information, practices can implement more effective A&F interventions to improve quality of care.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-3462705
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2012
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-34627052012-10-03 Improving quality of care through improved audit and feedback Hysong, Sylvia J Teal, Cayla R Khan, Myrna J Haidet, Paul Implement Sci Study Protocol BACKGROUND: The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) has led the industry in measuring facility performance as a critical element in improving quality of care, investing substantial resources to develop and maintain valid and cost-effective measures. The External Peer Review Program (EPRP) of the VA is the official data source for monitoring facility performance, used to prioritize the quality areas needing most attention. Facility performance measurement has significantly improved preventive and chronic care, as well as overall quality; however, much variability still exists in levels of performance across measures and facilities. Audit and feedback (A&F), an important component of effective performance measurement, can help reduce this variability and improve overall performance. Previous research suggests that VA Medical Centers (VAMCs) with high EPRP performance scores tend to use EPRP data as a feedback source. However, the manner in which EPRP data are used as a feedback source by individual providers as well as service line, facility, and network leadership is not well understood. An in-depth understanding of mental models, strategies, and specific feedback process characteristics adopted by high-performing facilities is thus urgently needed. This research compares how leaders of high, low, and moderately performing VAMCs use clinical performance data from the EPRP as a feedback tool to maintain and improve quality of care. METHODS: We will conduct a qualitative, grounded theory analysis of up to 64 interviews using a novel method of sampling primary care, facility, and Veterans Integrated Service Network (VISN) leadership at high-, moderate-, and low-performing facilities. We will analyze interviews for evidence of cross-facility differences in perceptions of performance data usefulness and strategies for disseminating performance data evaluating performance, with particular attention to timeliness, individualization, and punitiveness of feedback delivery. DISCUSSION: Most research examining feedback to improve provider and facility performance lacks a detailed understanding of the elements of effective feedback. This research will highlight the elements most commonly used at high-performing facilities and identify additional features of their successful feedback strategies not previously identified. Armed with this information, practices can implement more effective A&F interventions to improve quality of care. BioMed Central 2012-05-18 /pmc/articles/PMC3462705/ /pubmed/22607640 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1748-5908-7-45 Text en Copyright ©2012 Hysong et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Study Protocol
Hysong, Sylvia J
Teal, Cayla R
Khan, Myrna J
Haidet, Paul
Improving quality of care through improved audit and feedback
title Improving quality of care through improved audit and feedback
title_full Improving quality of care through improved audit and feedback
title_fullStr Improving quality of care through improved audit and feedback
title_full_unstemmed Improving quality of care through improved audit and feedback
title_short Improving quality of care through improved audit and feedback
title_sort improving quality of care through improved audit and feedback
topic Study Protocol
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3462705/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22607640
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1748-5908-7-45
work_keys_str_mv AT hysongsylviaj improvingqualityofcarethroughimprovedauditandfeedback
AT tealcaylar improvingqualityofcarethroughimprovedauditandfeedback
AT khanmyrnaj improvingqualityofcarethroughimprovedauditandfeedback
AT haidetpaul improvingqualityofcarethroughimprovedauditandfeedback