Cargando…
The impact of redesigning care processes on quality of care: a systematic review
BACKGROUND: This literature review evaluates the current state of knowledge about the impact of process redesign on the quality of healthcare. METHODS: Pubmed, CINAHL, Web of Science and Business Premier Source were searched for relevant studies published in the last ten years [2004–2014]. To be inc...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2016
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4717535/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26782132 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12913-016-1266-0 |
_version_ | 1782410667446239232 |
---|---|
author | van Leijen-Zeelenberg, Janneke E. Elissen, Arianne M. J. Grube, Kerstin van Raak, Arno J. A. Vrijhoef, Hubertus J. M. Kremer, Bernd Ruwaard, Dirk |
author_facet | van Leijen-Zeelenberg, Janneke E. Elissen, Arianne M. J. Grube, Kerstin van Raak, Arno J. A. Vrijhoef, Hubertus J. M. Kremer, Bernd Ruwaard, Dirk |
author_sort | van Leijen-Zeelenberg, Janneke E. |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: This literature review evaluates the current state of knowledge about the impact of process redesign on the quality of healthcare. METHODS: Pubmed, CINAHL, Web of Science and Business Premier Source were searched for relevant studies published in the last ten years [2004–2014]. To be included, studies had to be original research, published in English with a before-and-after study design, and be focused on changes in healthcare processes and quality of care. Studies that met the inclusion criteria were independently assessed for excellence in reporting by three reviewers using the SQUIRE checklist. Data was extracted using a framework developed for this review. RESULTS: Reporting adequacy varied across the studies. Process redesign interventions were diverse, and none of the studies described their effects on all dimensions of quality defined by the Institute of Medicine. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this systematic literature review suggests that process redesign interventions have positive effects on certain aspects of quality. However, the full impact cannot be determined on the basis of the literature. A wide range of outcome measures were used, and research methods were limited. This review demonstrates the need for further investigation of the impact of redesign interventions on the quality of healthcare. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-4717535 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2016 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-47175352016-01-20 The impact of redesigning care processes on quality of care: a systematic review van Leijen-Zeelenberg, Janneke E. Elissen, Arianne M. J. Grube, Kerstin van Raak, Arno J. A. Vrijhoef, Hubertus J. M. Kremer, Bernd Ruwaard, Dirk BMC Health Serv Res Research Article BACKGROUND: This literature review evaluates the current state of knowledge about the impact of process redesign on the quality of healthcare. METHODS: Pubmed, CINAHL, Web of Science and Business Premier Source were searched for relevant studies published in the last ten years [2004–2014]. To be included, studies had to be original research, published in English with a before-and-after study design, and be focused on changes in healthcare processes and quality of care. Studies that met the inclusion criteria were independently assessed for excellence in reporting by three reviewers using the SQUIRE checklist. Data was extracted using a framework developed for this review. RESULTS: Reporting adequacy varied across the studies. Process redesign interventions were diverse, and none of the studies described their effects on all dimensions of quality defined by the Institute of Medicine. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this systematic literature review suggests that process redesign interventions have positive effects on certain aspects of quality. However, the full impact cannot be determined on the basis of the literature. A wide range of outcome measures were used, and research methods were limited. This review demonstrates the need for further investigation of the impact of redesign interventions on the quality of healthcare. BioMed Central 2016-01-19 /pmc/articles/PMC4717535/ /pubmed/26782132 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12913-016-1266-0 Text en © van Leijen-Zeelenberg et al. 2016 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. 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 van Leijen-Zeelenberg, Janneke E. Elissen, Arianne M. J. Grube, Kerstin van Raak, Arno J. A. Vrijhoef, Hubertus J. M. Kremer, Bernd Ruwaard, Dirk The impact of redesigning care processes on quality of care: a systematic review |
title | The impact of redesigning care processes on quality of care: a systematic review |
title_full | The impact of redesigning care processes on quality of care: a systematic review |
title_fullStr | The impact of redesigning care processes on quality of care: a systematic review |
title_full_unstemmed | The impact of redesigning care processes on quality of care: a systematic review |
title_short | The impact of redesigning care processes on quality of care: a systematic review |
title_sort | impact of redesigning care processes on quality of care: a systematic review |
topic | Research Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4717535/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26782132 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12913-016-1266-0 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT vanleijenzeelenbergjannekee theimpactofredesigningcareprocessesonqualityofcareasystematicreview AT elissenariannemj theimpactofredesigningcareprocessesonqualityofcareasystematicreview AT grubekerstin theimpactofredesigningcareprocessesonqualityofcareasystematicreview AT vanraakarnoja theimpactofredesigningcareprocessesonqualityofcareasystematicreview AT vrijhoefhubertusjm theimpactofredesigningcareprocessesonqualityofcareasystematicreview AT kremerbernd theimpactofredesigningcareprocessesonqualityofcareasystematicreview AT ruwaarddirk theimpactofredesigningcareprocessesonqualityofcareasystematicreview AT vanleijenzeelenbergjannekee impactofredesigningcareprocessesonqualityofcareasystematicreview AT elissenariannemj impactofredesigningcareprocessesonqualityofcareasystematicreview AT grubekerstin impactofredesigningcareprocessesonqualityofcareasystematicreview AT vanraakarnoja impactofredesigningcareprocessesonqualityofcareasystematicreview AT vrijhoefhubertusjm impactofredesigningcareprocessesonqualityofcareasystematicreview AT kremerbernd impactofredesigningcareprocessesonqualityofcareasystematicreview AT ruwaarddirk impactofredesigningcareprocessesonqualityofcareasystematicreview |