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...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: 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
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