Cargando…

Voluntary peer review as innovative tool for quality improvement in the intensive care unit – a retrospective descriptive cohort study in German intensive care units

Introduction: Quality improvement and safety in intensive care are rapidly evolving topics. However, there is no gold standard for assessing quality improvement in intensive care medicine yet. In 2007 a pilot project in German intensive care units (ICUs) started using voluntary peer reviews as an in...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Kumpf, Oliver, Bloos, Frank, Bause, Hanswerner, Brinkmann, Alexander, Deja, Maria, Marx, Gernot, Kaltwasser, Arnold, Dubb, Rolf, Muhl, Elke, Greim, Clemens-A., Weiler, Norbert, Chop, Ines, Jonitz, Günther, Schaefer, Henning, Felsenstein, Matthias, Liebeskind, Ursula, Leffmann, Carsten, Jungbluth, Annemarie, Waydhas, Christian, Pronovost, Peter, Spies, Claudia, Braun, Jan-Peter
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: German Medical Science GMS Publishing House 2014
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4270273/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25587245
http://dx.doi.org/10.3205/000202
_version_ 1782349466437681152
author Kumpf, Oliver
Bloos, Frank
Bause, Hanswerner
Brinkmann, Alexander
Deja, Maria
Marx, Gernot
Kaltwasser, Arnold
Dubb, Rolf
Muhl, Elke
Greim, Clemens-A.
Weiler, Norbert
Chop, Ines
Jonitz, Günther
Schaefer, Henning
Felsenstein, Matthias
Liebeskind, Ursula
Leffmann, Carsten
Jungbluth, Annemarie
Waydhas, Christian
Pronovost, Peter
Spies, Claudia
Braun, Jan-Peter
author_facet Kumpf, Oliver
Bloos, Frank
Bause, Hanswerner
Brinkmann, Alexander
Deja, Maria
Marx, Gernot
Kaltwasser, Arnold
Dubb, Rolf
Muhl, Elke
Greim, Clemens-A.
Weiler, Norbert
Chop, Ines
Jonitz, Günther
Schaefer, Henning
Felsenstein, Matthias
Liebeskind, Ursula
Leffmann, Carsten
Jungbluth, Annemarie
Waydhas, Christian
Pronovost, Peter
Spies, Claudia
Braun, Jan-Peter
author_sort Kumpf, Oliver
collection PubMed
description Introduction: Quality improvement and safety in intensive care are rapidly evolving topics. However, there is no gold standard for assessing quality improvement in intensive care medicine yet. In 2007 a pilot project in German intensive care units (ICUs) started using voluntary peer reviews as an innovative tool for quality assessment and improvement. We describe the method of voluntary peer review and assessed its feasibility by evaluating anonymized peer review reports and analysed the thematic clusters highlighted in these reports. Methods: Retrospective data analysis from 22 anonymous reports of peer reviews. All ICUs – representing over 300 patient beds – had undergone voluntary peer review. Data were retrieved from reports of peers of the review teams and representatives of visited ICUs. Data were analysed with regard to number of topics addressed and results of assessment questionnaires. Reports of strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats (SWOT reports) of these ICUs are presented. Results: External assessment of structure, process and outcome indicators revealed high percentages of adherence to predefined quality goals. In the SWOT reports 11 main thematic clusters were identified representative for common ICUs. 58.1% of mentioned topics covered personnel issues, team and communication issues as well as organisation and treatment standards. The most mentioned weaknesses were observed in the issues documentation/reporting, hygiene and ethics. We identified several unique patterns regarding quality in the ICU of which long-term personnel problems und lack of good reporting methods were most interesting Conclusion: Voluntary peer review could be established as a feasible and valuable tool for quality improvement. Peer reports addressed common areas of interest in intensive care medicine in more detail compared to other methods like measurement of quality indicators.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4270273
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2014
publisher German Medical Science GMS Publishing House
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-42702732015-01-13 Voluntary peer review as innovative tool for quality improvement in the intensive care unit – a retrospective descriptive cohort study in German intensive care units Kumpf, Oliver Bloos, Frank Bause, Hanswerner Brinkmann, Alexander Deja, Maria Marx, Gernot Kaltwasser, Arnold Dubb, Rolf Muhl, Elke Greim, Clemens-A. Weiler, Norbert Chop, Ines Jonitz, Günther Schaefer, Henning Felsenstein, Matthias Liebeskind, Ursula Leffmann, Carsten Jungbluth, Annemarie Waydhas, Christian Pronovost, Peter Spies, Claudia Braun, Jan-Peter Ger Med Sci Article Introduction: Quality improvement and safety in intensive care are rapidly evolving topics. However, there is no gold standard for assessing quality improvement in intensive care medicine yet. In 2007 a pilot project in German intensive care units (ICUs) started using voluntary peer reviews as an innovative tool for quality assessment and improvement. We describe the method of voluntary peer review and assessed its feasibility by evaluating anonymized peer review reports and analysed the thematic clusters highlighted in these reports. Methods: Retrospective data analysis from 22 anonymous reports of peer reviews. All ICUs – representing over 300 patient beds – had undergone voluntary peer review. Data were retrieved from reports of peers of the review teams and representatives of visited ICUs. Data were analysed with regard to number of topics addressed and results of assessment questionnaires. Reports of strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats (SWOT reports) of these ICUs are presented. Results: External assessment of structure, process and outcome indicators revealed high percentages of adherence to predefined quality goals. In the SWOT reports 11 main thematic clusters were identified representative for common ICUs. 58.1% of mentioned topics covered personnel issues, team and communication issues as well as organisation and treatment standards. The most mentioned weaknesses were observed in the issues documentation/reporting, hygiene and ethics. We identified several unique patterns regarding quality in the ICU of which long-term personnel problems und lack of good reporting methods were most interesting Conclusion: Voluntary peer review could be established as a feasible and valuable tool for quality improvement. Peer reports addressed common areas of interest in intensive care medicine in more detail compared to other methods like measurement of quality indicators. German Medical Science GMS Publishing House 2014-12-15 /pmc/articles/PMC4270273/ /pubmed/25587245 http://dx.doi.org/10.3205/000202 Text en Copyright © 2014 Kumpf et al. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/ This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/). You are free to copy, distribute and transmit the work, provided the original author and source are credited.
spellingShingle Article
Kumpf, Oliver
Bloos, Frank
Bause, Hanswerner
Brinkmann, Alexander
Deja, Maria
Marx, Gernot
Kaltwasser, Arnold
Dubb, Rolf
Muhl, Elke
Greim, Clemens-A.
Weiler, Norbert
Chop, Ines
Jonitz, Günther
Schaefer, Henning
Felsenstein, Matthias
Liebeskind, Ursula
Leffmann, Carsten
Jungbluth, Annemarie
Waydhas, Christian
Pronovost, Peter
Spies, Claudia
Braun, Jan-Peter
Voluntary peer review as innovative tool for quality improvement in the intensive care unit – a retrospective descriptive cohort study in German intensive care units
title Voluntary peer review as innovative tool for quality improvement in the intensive care unit – a retrospective descriptive cohort study in German intensive care units
title_full Voluntary peer review as innovative tool for quality improvement in the intensive care unit – a retrospective descriptive cohort study in German intensive care units
title_fullStr Voluntary peer review as innovative tool for quality improvement in the intensive care unit – a retrospective descriptive cohort study in German intensive care units
title_full_unstemmed Voluntary peer review as innovative tool for quality improvement in the intensive care unit – a retrospective descriptive cohort study in German intensive care units
title_short Voluntary peer review as innovative tool for quality improvement in the intensive care unit – a retrospective descriptive cohort study in German intensive care units
title_sort voluntary peer review as innovative tool for quality improvement in the intensive care unit – a retrospective descriptive cohort study in german intensive care units
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4270273/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25587245
http://dx.doi.org/10.3205/000202
work_keys_str_mv AT kumpfoliver voluntarypeerreviewasinnovativetoolforqualityimprovementintheintensivecareunitaretrospectivedescriptivecohortstudyingermanintensivecareunits
AT bloosfrank voluntarypeerreviewasinnovativetoolforqualityimprovementintheintensivecareunitaretrospectivedescriptivecohortstudyingermanintensivecareunits
AT bausehanswerner voluntarypeerreviewasinnovativetoolforqualityimprovementintheintensivecareunitaretrospectivedescriptivecohortstudyingermanintensivecareunits
AT brinkmannalexander voluntarypeerreviewasinnovativetoolforqualityimprovementintheintensivecareunitaretrospectivedescriptivecohortstudyingermanintensivecareunits
AT dejamaria voluntarypeerreviewasinnovativetoolforqualityimprovementintheintensivecareunitaretrospectivedescriptivecohortstudyingermanintensivecareunits
AT marxgernot voluntarypeerreviewasinnovativetoolforqualityimprovementintheintensivecareunitaretrospectivedescriptivecohortstudyingermanintensivecareunits
AT kaltwasserarnold voluntarypeerreviewasinnovativetoolforqualityimprovementintheintensivecareunitaretrospectivedescriptivecohortstudyingermanintensivecareunits
AT dubbrolf voluntarypeerreviewasinnovativetoolforqualityimprovementintheintensivecareunitaretrospectivedescriptivecohortstudyingermanintensivecareunits
AT muhlelke voluntarypeerreviewasinnovativetoolforqualityimprovementintheintensivecareunitaretrospectivedescriptivecohortstudyingermanintensivecareunits
AT greimclemensa voluntarypeerreviewasinnovativetoolforqualityimprovementintheintensivecareunitaretrospectivedescriptivecohortstudyingermanintensivecareunits
AT weilernorbert voluntarypeerreviewasinnovativetoolforqualityimprovementintheintensivecareunitaretrospectivedescriptivecohortstudyingermanintensivecareunits
AT chopines voluntarypeerreviewasinnovativetoolforqualityimprovementintheintensivecareunitaretrospectivedescriptivecohortstudyingermanintensivecareunits
AT jonitzgunther voluntarypeerreviewasinnovativetoolforqualityimprovementintheintensivecareunitaretrospectivedescriptivecohortstudyingermanintensivecareunits
AT schaeferhenning voluntarypeerreviewasinnovativetoolforqualityimprovementintheintensivecareunitaretrospectivedescriptivecohortstudyingermanintensivecareunits
AT felsensteinmatthias voluntarypeerreviewasinnovativetoolforqualityimprovementintheintensivecareunitaretrospectivedescriptivecohortstudyingermanintensivecareunits
AT liebeskindursula voluntarypeerreviewasinnovativetoolforqualityimprovementintheintensivecareunitaretrospectivedescriptivecohortstudyingermanintensivecareunits
AT leffmanncarsten voluntarypeerreviewasinnovativetoolforqualityimprovementintheintensivecareunitaretrospectivedescriptivecohortstudyingermanintensivecareunits
AT jungbluthannemarie voluntarypeerreviewasinnovativetoolforqualityimprovementintheintensivecareunitaretrospectivedescriptivecohortstudyingermanintensivecareunits
AT waydhaschristian voluntarypeerreviewasinnovativetoolforqualityimprovementintheintensivecareunitaretrospectivedescriptivecohortstudyingermanintensivecareunits
AT pronovostpeter voluntarypeerreviewasinnovativetoolforqualityimprovementintheintensivecareunitaretrospectivedescriptivecohortstudyingermanintensivecareunits
AT spiesclaudia voluntarypeerreviewasinnovativetoolforqualityimprovementintheintensivecareunitaretrospectivedescriptivecohortstudyingermanintensivecareunits
AT braunjanpeter voluntarypeerreviewasinnovativetoolforqualityimprovementintheintensivecareunitaretrospectivedescriptivecohortstudyingermanintensivecareunits
AT voluntarypeerreviewasinnovativetoolforqualityimprovementintheintensivecareunitaretrospectivedescriptivecohortstudyingermanintensivecareunits