Cargando…
Stakeholder Engagement to Identify Priorities for Improving the Quality and Value of Critical Care
BACKGROUND: Large amounts of scientific evidence are generated, but not implemented into patient care (the ‘knowledge-to-care’ gap). We identified and prioritized knowledge-to-care gaps in critical care as opportunities to improve the quality and value of healthcare. METHODS: We used a multi-method...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Public Library of Science
2015
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4619641/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26492196 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0140141 |
_version_ | 1782397149189767168 |
---|---|
author | Stelfox, Henry T. Niven, Daniel J. Clement, Fiona M. Bagshaw, Sean M. Cook, Deborah J. McKenzie, Emily Potestio, Melissa L. Doig, Christopher J. O’Neill, Barbara Zygun, David |
author_facet | Stelfox, Henry T. Niven, Daniel J. Clement, Fiona M. Bagshaw, Sean M. Cook, Deborah J. McKenzie, Emily Potestio, Melissa L. Doig, Christopher J. O’Neill, Barbara Zygun, David |
author_sort | Stelfox, Henry T. |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Large amounts of scientific evidence are generated, but not implemented into patient care (the ‘knowledge-to-care’ gap). We identified and prioritized knowledge-to-care gaps in critical care as opportunities to improve the quality and value of healthcare. METHODS: We used a multi-method community-based participatory research approach to engage a Network of all adult (n = 14) and pediatric (n = 2) medical-surgical intensive care units (ICUs) in a fully integrated geographically defined healthcare system serving 4 million residents. Participants included Network oversight committee members (n = 38) and frontline providers (n = 1,790). Network committee members used a modified RAND/University of California Appropriateness Methodology, to serially propose, rate (validated 9 point scale) and revise potential knowledge-to-care gaps as priorities for improvement. The priorities were sent to frontline providers for evaluation. Results were relayed back to all frontline providers for feedback. RESULTS: Initially, 68 knowledge-to-care gaps were proposed, rated and revised by the committee (n = 32 participants) over 3 rounds of review and resulted in 13 proposed priorities for improvement. Then, 1,103 providers (62% response rate) evaluated the priorities, and rated 9 as ‘necessary’ (median score 7–9). Several factors were associated with rating priorities as necessary in multivariable logistic regression, related to the provider (experience, teaching status of ICU) and topic (strength of supporting evidence, potential to benefit the patient, potential to improve patient/family experience, potential to decrease costs). CONCLUSIONS: A community-based participatory research approach engaged a diverse group of stakeholders to identify 9 priorities for improving the quality and value of critical care. The approach was time and cost efficient and could serve as a model to prioritize areas for research quality improvement across other settings. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-4619641 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2015 |
publisher | Public Library of Science |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-46196412015-10-29 Stakeholder Engagement to Identify Priorities for Improving the Quality and Value of Critical Care Stelfox, Henry T. Niven, Daniel J. Clement, Fiona M. Bagshaw, Sean M. Cook, Deborah J. McKenzie, Emily Potestio, Melissa L. Doig, Christopher J. O’Neill, Barbara Zygun, David PLoS One Research Article BACKGROUND: Large amounts of scientific evidence are generated, but not implemented into patient care (the ‘knowledge-to-care’ gap). We identified and prioritized knowledge-to-care gaps in critical care as opportunities to improve the quality and value of healthcare. METHODS: We used a multi-method community-based participatory research approach to engage a Network of all adult (n = 14) and pediatric (n = 2) medical-surgical intensive care units (ICUs) in a fully integrated geographically defined healthcare system serving 4 million residents. Participants included Network oversight committee members (n = 38) and frontline providers (n = 1,790). Network committee members used a modified RAND/University of California Appropriateness Methodology, to serially propose, rate (validated 9 point scale) and revise potential knowledge-to-care gaps as priorities for improvement. The priorities were sent to frontline providers for evaluation. Results were relayed back to all frontline providers for feedback. RESULTS: Initially, 68 knowledge-to-care gaps were proposed, rated and revised by the committee (n = 32 participants) over 3 rounds of review and resulted in 13 proposed priorities for improvement. Then, 1,103 providers (62% response rate) evaluated the priorities, and rated 9 as ‘necessary’ (median score 7–9). Several factors were associated with rating priorities as necessary in multivariable logistic regression, related to the provider (experience, teaching status of ICU) and topic (strength of supporting evidence, potential to benefit the patient, potential to improve patient/family experience, potential to decrease costs). CONCLUSIONS: A community-based participatory research approach engaged a diverse group of stakeholders to identify 9 priorities for improving the quality and value of critical care. The approach was time and cost efficient and could serve as a model to prioritize areas for research quality improvement across other settings. Public Library of Science 2015-10-22 /pmc/articles/PMC4619641/ /pubmed/26492196 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0140141 Text en © 2015 Stelfox et al http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are properly credited. |
spellingShingle | Research Article Stelfox, Henry T. Niven, Daniel J. Clement, Fiona M. Bagshaw, Sean M. Cook, Deborah J. McKenzie, Emily Potestio, Melissa L. Doig, Christopher J. O’Neill, Barbara Zygun, David Stakeholder Engagement to Identify Priorities for Improving the Quality and Value of Critical Care |
title | Stakeholder Engagement to Identify Priorities for Improving the Quality and Value of Critical Care |
title_full | Stakeholder Engagement to Identify Priorities for Improving the Quality and Value of Critical Care |
title_fullStr | Stakeholder Engagement to Identify Priorities for Improving the Quality and Value of Critical Care |
title_full_unstemmed | Stakeholder Engagement to Identify Priorities for Improving the Quality and Value of Critical Care |
title_short | Stakeholder Engagement to Identify Priorities for Improving the Quality and Value of Critical Care |
title_sort | stakeholder engagement to identify priorities for improving the quality and value of critical care |
topic | Research Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4619641/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26492196 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0140141 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT stelfoxhenryt stakeholderengagementtoidentifyprioritiesforimprovingthequalityandvalueofcriticalcare AT nivendanielj stakeholderengagementtoidentifyprioritiesforimprovingthequalityandvalueofcriticalcare AT clementfionam stakeholderengagementtoidentifyprioritiesforimprovingthequalityandvalueofcriticalcare AT bagshawseanm stakeholderengagementtoidentifyprioritiesforimprovingthequalityandvalueofcriticalcare AT cookdeborahj stakeholderengagementtoidentifyprioritiesforimprovingthequalityandvalueofcriticalcare AT mckenzieemily stakeholderengagementtoidentifyprioritiesforimprovingthequalityandvalueofcriticalcare AT potestiomelissal stakeholderengagementtoidentifyprioritiesforimprovingthequalityandvalueofcriticalcare AT doigchristopherj stakeholderengagementtoidentifyprioritiesforimprovingthequalityandvalueofcriticalcare AT oneillbarbara stakeholderengagementtoidentifyprioritiesforimprovingthequalityandvalueofcriticalcare AT zygundavid stakeholderengagementtoidentifyprioritiesforimprovingthequalityandvalueofcriticalcare AT stakeholderengagementtoidentifyprioritiesforimprovingthequalityandvalueofcriticalcare |