Cargando…

Facilitators and barriers to applying a national quality registry for quality improvement in stroke care

BACKGROUND: National quality registries (NQRs) purportedly facilitate quality improvement, while neither the extent nor the mechanisms of such a relationship are fully known. The aim of this case study is to describe the experiences of local stakeholders to determine those elements that facilitate a...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Eldh, Ann Catrine, Fredriksson, Mio, Halford, Christina, Wallin, Lars, Dahlström, Tobias, Vengberg, Sofie, Winblad, Ulrika
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2014
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4153899/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25158882
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1472-6963-14-354
_version_ 1782333348229677056
author Eldh, Ann Catrine
Fredriksson, Mio
Halford, Christina
Wallin, Lars
Dahlström, Tobias
Vengberg, Sofie
Winblad, Ulrika
author_facet Eldh, Ann Catrine
Fredriksson, Mio
Halford, Christina
Wallin, Lars
Dahlström, Tobias
Vengberg, Sofie
Winblad, Ulrika
author_sort Eldh, Ann Catrine
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: National quality registries (NQRs) purportedly facilitate quality improvement, while neither the extent nor the mechanisms of such a relationship are fully known. The aim of this case study is to describe the experiences of local stakeholders to determine those elements that facilitate and hinder clinical quality improvement in relation to participation in a well-known and established NQR on stroke in Sweden. METHODS: A strategic sample was drawn of 8 hospitals in 4 county councils, representing a variety of settings and outcomes according to the NQR’s criteria. Semi-structured telephone interviews were conducted with 25 managers, physicians in charge of the Riks-Stroke, and registered nurses registering local data at the hospitals. Interviews, including aspects of barriers and facilitators within the NQR and the local context, were analysed with content analysis. RESULTS: An NQR can provide vital aspects for facilitating evidence-based practice, for example, local data drawn from national guidelines which can be used for comparisons over time within the organisation or with other hospitals. Major effort is required to ensure that data entries are accurate and valid, and thus the trustworthiness of local data output competes with resources needed for everyday clinical stroke care and quality improvement initiatives. Local stakeholders with knowledge of and interest in both the medical area (in this case stroke) and quality improvement can apply the NQR data to effectively initiate, carry out, and evaluate quality improvement, if supported by managers and co-workers, a common stroke care process and an operational management system that embraces and engages with the NQR data. CONCLUSION: While quality registries are assumed to support adherence to evidence-based guidelines around the world, this study proposes that a NQR can facilitate improvement of care but neither the registry itself nor the reporting of data initiates quality improvement. Rather, the local and general evidence provided by the NQR must be considered relevant and must be applied in the local context. Further, the quality improvement process needs to be facilitated by stakeholders collaborating within and outside the context, who know how to initiate, perform, and evaluate quality improvement, and who have the resources to do so.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4153899
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2014
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-41538992014-09-05 Facilitators and barriers to applying a national quality registry for quality improvement in stroke care Eldh, Ann Catrine Fredriksson, Mio Halford, Christina Wallin, Lars Dahlström, Tobias Vengberg, Sofie Winblad, Ulrika BMC Health Serv Res Research Article BACKGROUND: National quality registries (NQRs) purportedly facilitate quality improvement, while neither the extent nor the mechanisms of such a relationship are fully known. The aim of this case study is to describe the experiences of local stakeholders to determine those elements that facilitate and hinder clinical quality improvement in relation to participation in a well-known and established NQR on stroke in Sweden. METHODS: A strategic sample was drawn of 8 hospitals in 4 county councils, representing a variety of settings and outcomes according to the NQR’s criteria. Semi-structured telephone interviews were conducted with 25 managers, physicians in charge of the Riks-Stroke, and registered nurses registering local data at the hospitals. Interviews, including aspects of barriers and facilitators within the NQR and the local context, were analysed with content analysis. RESULTS: An NQR can provide vital aspects for facilitating evidence-based practice, for example, local data drawn from national guidelines which can be used for comparisons over time within the organisation or with other hospitals. Major effort is required to ensure that data entries are accurate and valid, and thus the trustworthiness of local data output competes with resources needed for everyday clinical stroke care and quality improvement initiatives. Local stakeholders with knowledge of and interest in both the medical area (in this case stroke) and quality improvement can apply the NQR data to effectively initiate, carry out, and evaluate quality improvement, if supported by managers and co-workers, a common stroke care process and an operational management system that embraces and engages with the NQR data. CONCLUSION: While quality registries are assumed to support adherence to evidence-based guidelines around the world, this study proposes that a NQR can facilitate improvement of care but neither the registry itself nor the reporting of data initiates quality improvement. Rather, the local and general evidence provided by the NQR must be considered relevant and must be applied in the local context. Further, the quality improvement process needs to be facilitated by stakeholders collaborating within and outside the context, who know how to initiate, perform, and evaluate quality improvement, and who have the resources to do so. BioMed Central 2014-08-27 /pmc/articles/PMC4153899/ /pubmed/25158882 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1472-6963-14-354 Text en © Eldh et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. 2014 This article is published under license to BioMed Central Ltd. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0), 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 Article
Eldh, Ann Catrine
Fredriksson, Mio
Halford, Christina
Wallin, Lars
Dahlström, Tobias
Vengberg, Sofie
Winblad, Ulrika
Facilitators and barriers to applying a national quality registry for quality improvement in stroke care
title Facilitators and barriers to applying a national quality registry for quality improvement in stroke care
title_full Facilitators and barriers to applying a national quality registry for quality improvement in stroke care
title_fullStr Facilitators and barriers to applying a national quality registry for quality improvement in stroke care
title_full_unstemmed Facilitators and barriers to applying a national quality registry for quality improvement in stroke care
title_short Facilitators and barriers to applying a national quality registry for quality improvement in stroke care
title_sort facilitators and barriers to applying a national quality registry for quality improvement in stroke care
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4153899/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25158882
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1472-6963-14-354
work_keys_str_mv AT eldhanncatrine facilitatorsandbarrierstoapplyinganationalqualityregistryforqualityimprovementinstrokecare
AT fredrikssonmio facilitatorsandbarrierstoapplyinganationalqualityregistryforqualityimprovementinstrokecare
AT halfordchristina facilitatorsandbarrierstoapplyinganationalqualityregistryforqualityimprovementinstrokecare
AT wallinlars facilitatorsandbarrierstoapplyinganationalqualityregistryforqualityimprovementinstrokecare
AT dahlstromtobias facilitatorsandbarrierstoapplyinganationalqualityregistryforqualityimprovementinstrokecare
AT vengbergsofie facilitatorsandbarrierstoapplyinganationalqualityregistryforqualityimprovementinstrokecare
AT winbladulrika facilitatorsandbarrierstoapplyinganationalqualityregistryforqualityimprovementinstrokecare