Cargando…

Did a quality improvement collaborative make stroke care better? A cluster randomized trial

BACKGROUND: Stroke can result in death and long-term disability. Fast and high-quality care can reduce the impact of stroke, but UK national audit data has demonstrated variability in compliance with recommended processes of care. Though quality improvement collaboratives (QICs) are widely used, whe...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Power, Maxine, Tyrrell, Pippa J, Rudd, Anthony G, Tully, Mary P, Dalton, David, Marshall, Martin, Chappell, Ian, Corgié, Delphine, Goldmann, Don, Webb, Dale, Dixon-Woods, Mary, Parry, Gareth
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2014
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3997843/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24690267
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1748-5908-9-40
_version_ 1782313243398635520
author Power, Maxine
Tyrrell, Pippa J
Rudd, Anthony G
Tully, Mary P
Dalton, David
Marshall, Martin
Chappell, Ian
Corgié, Delphine
Goldmann, Don
Webb, Dale
Dixon-Woods, Mary
Parry, Gareth
author_facet Power, Maxine
Tyrrell, Pippa J
Rudd, Anthony G
Tully, Mary P
Dalton, David
Marshall, Martin
Chappell, Ian
Corgié, Delphine
Goldmann, Don
Webb, Dale
Dixon-Woods, Mary
Parry, Gareth
author_sort Power, Maxine
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Stroke can result in death and long-term disability. Fast and high-quality care can reduce the impact of stroke, but UK national audit data has demonstrated variability in compliance with recommended processes of care. Though quality improvement collaboratives (QICs) are widely used, whether a QIC could improve reliability of stroke care was unknown. METHODS: Twenty-four NHS hospitals in the Northwest of England were randomly allocated to participate either in Stroke 90:10, a QIC based on the Breakthrough Series (BTS) model, or to a control group giving normal care. The QIC focused on nine processes of quality care for stroke already used in the national stroke audit. The nine processes were grouped into two distinct care bundles: one relating to early hours care and one relating to rehabilitation following stroke. Using an interrupted time series design and difference-in-difference analysis, we aimed to determine whether hospitals participating in the QIC improved more than the control group on bundle compliance. RESULTS: Data were available from nine interventions (3,533 patients) and nine control hospitals (3,059 patients). Hospitals in the QIC showed a modest improvement from baseline in the odds of average compliance equivalent to a relative improvement of 10.9% (95% CI 1.3%, 20.6%) in the Early Hours Bundle and 11.2% (95% CI 1.4%, 21.5%) in the Rehabilitation Bundle. Secondary analysis suggested that some specific processes were more sensitive to an intervention effect. CONCLUSIONS: Some aspects of stroke care improved during the QIC, but the effects of the QIC were modest and further improvement is needed. The extent to which a BTS QIC can improve quality of stroke care remains uncertain. Some aspects of care may respond better to collaboratives than others. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN13893902.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-3997843
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2014
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-39978432014-04-25 Did a quality improvement collaborative make stroke care better? A cluster randomized trial Power, Maxine Tyrrell, Pippa J Rudd, Anthony G Tully, Mary P Dalton, David Marshall, Martin Chappell, Ian Corgié, Delphine Goldmann, Don Webb, Dale Dixon-Woods, Mary Parry, Gareth Implement Sci Research BACKGROUND: Stroke can result in death and long-term disability. Fast and high-quality care can reduce the impact of stroke, but UK national audit data has demonstrated variability in compliance with recommended processes of care. Though quality improvement collaboratives (QICs) are widely used, whether a QIC could improve reliability of stroke care was unknown. METHODS: Twenty-four NHS hospitals in the Northwest of England were randomly allocated to participate either in Stroke 90:10, a QIC based on the Breakthrough Series (BTS) model, or to a control group giving normal care. The QIC focused on nine processes of quality care for stroke already used in the national stroke audit. The nine processes were grouped into two distinct care bundles: one relating to early hours care and one relating to rehabilitation following stroke. Using an interrupted time series design and difference-in-difference analysis, we aimed to determine whether hospitals participating in the QIC improved more than the control group on bundle compliance. RESULTS: Data were available from nine interventions (3,533 patients) and nine control hospitals (3,059 patients). Hospitals in the QIC showed a modest improvement from baseline in the odds of average compliance equivalent to a relative improvement of 10.9% (95% CI 1.3%, 20.6%) in the Early Hours Bundle and 11.2% (95% CI 1.4%, 21.5%) in the Rehabilitation Bundle. Secondary analysis suggested that some specific processes were more sensitive to an intervention effect. CONCLUSIONS: Some aspects of stroke care improved during the QIC, but the effects of the QIC were modest and further improvement is needed. The extent to which a BTS QIC can improve quality of stroke care remains uncertain. Some aspects of care may respond better to collaboratives than others. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN13893902. BioMed Central 2014-04-01 /pmc/articles/PMC3997843/ /pubmed/24690267 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1748-5908-9-40 Text en Copyright © 2014 Power 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 credited. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Research
Power, Maxine
Tyrrell, Pippa J
Rudd, Anthony G
Tully, Mary P
Dalton, David
Marshall, Martin
Chappell, Ian
Corgié, Delphine
Goldmann, Don
Webb, Dale
Dixon-Woods, Mary
Parry, Gareth
Did a quality improvement collaborative make stroke care better? A cluster randomized trial
title Did a quality improvement collaborative make stroke care better? A cluster randomized trial
title_full Did a quality improvement collaborative make stroke care better? A cluster randomized trial
title_fullStr Did a quality improvement collaborative make stroke care better? A cluster randomized trial
title_full_unstemmed Did a quality improvement collaborative make stroke care better? A cluster randomized trial
title_short Did a quality improvement collaborative make stroke care better? A cluster randomized trial
title_sort did a quality improvement collaborative make stroke care better? a cluster randomized trial
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3997843/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24690267
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1748-5908-9-40
work_keys_str_mv AT powermaxine didaqualityimprovementcollaborativemakestrokecarebetteraclusterrandomizedtrial
AT tyrrellpippaj didaqualityimprovementcollaborativemakestrokecarebetteraclusterrandomizedtrial
AT ruddanthonyg didaqualityimprovementcollaborativemakestrokecarebetteraclusterrandomizedtrial
AT tullymaryp didaqualityimprovementcollaborativemakestrokecarebetteraclusterrandomizedtrial
AT daltondavid didaqualityimprovementcollaborativemakestrokecarebetteraclusterrandomizedtrial
AT marshallmartin didaqualityimprovementcollaborativemakestrokecarebetteraclusterrandomizedtrial
AT chappellian didaqualityimprovementcollaborativemakestrokecarebetteraclusterrandomizedtrial
AT corgiedelphine didaqualityimprovementcollaborativemakestrokecarebetteraclusterrandomizedtrial
AT goldmanndon didaqualityimprovementcollaborativemakestrokecarebetteraclusterrandomizedtrial
AT webbdale didaqualityimprovementcollaborativemakestrokecarebetteraclusterrandomizedtrial
AT dixonwoodsmary didaqualityimprovementcollaborativemakestrokecarebetteraclusterrandomizedtrial
AT parrygareth didaqualityimprovementcollaborativemakestrokecarebetteraclusterrandomizedtrial