Cargando…
Use of interrupted time series methods in the evaluation of health system quality improvement interventions: a methodological systematic review
BACKGROUND: When randomisation is not possible, interrupted time series (ITS) design has increasingly been advocated as a more robust design to evaluating health system quality improvement (QI) interventions given its ability to control for common biases in healthcare QI. However, there is a potenti...
Autores principales: | , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BMJ Publishing Group
2020
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7559052/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33055094 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjgh-2020-003567 |
_version_ | 1783594772653408256 |
---|---|
author | Hategeka, Celestin Ruton, Hinda Karamouzian, Mohammad Lynd, Larry D Law, Michael R |
author_facet | Hategeka, Celestin Ruton, Hinda Karamouzian, Mohammad Lynd, Larry D Law, Michael R |
author_sort | Hategeka, Celestin |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: When randomisation is not possible, interrupted time series (ITS) design has increasingly been advocated as a more robust design to evaluating health system quality improvement (QI) interventions given its ability to control for common biases in healthcare QI. However, there is a potential risk of producing misleading results when this rather robust design is not used appropriately. We performed a methodological systematic review of the literature to investigate the extent to which the use of ITS has followed best practice standards and recommendations in the evaluation of QI interventions. METHODS: We searched multiple databases from inception to June 2018 to identify QI intervention studies that were evaluated using ITS. There was no restriction on date, language and participants. Data were synthesised narratively using appropriate descriptive statistics. The risk of bias for ITS studies was assessed using the Cochrane Effective Practice and Organisation of Care standard criteria. The systematic review protocol was registered in PROSPERO (registration number: CRD42018094427). RESULTS: Of 4061 potential studies and 2028 unique records screened for inclusion, 120 eligible studies assessed eight QI strategies and were from 25 countries. Most studies were published since 2010 (86.7%), reported data using monthly interval (71.4%), used ITS without a control (81%) and modelled data using segmented regression (62.5%). Autocorrelation was considered in 55% of studies, seasonality in 20.8% and non-stationarity in 8.3%. Only 49.2% of studies specified the ITS impact model. The risk of bias was high or very high in 72.5% of included studies and did not change significantly over time. CONCLUSIONS: The use of ITS in the evaluation of health system QI interventions has increased considerably over the past decade. However, variations in methodological considerations and reporting of ITS in QI remain a concern, warranting a need to develop and reinforce formal reporting guidelines to improve its application in the evaluation of health system QI interventions. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-7559052 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2020 |
publisher | BMJ Publishing Group |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-75590522020-10-19 Use of interrupted time series methods in the evaluation of health system quality improvement interventions: a methodological systematic review Hategeka, Celestin Ruton, Hinda Karamouzian, Mohammad Lynd, Larry D Law, Michael R BMJ Glob Health Original Research BACKGROUND: When randomisation is not possible, interrupted time series (ITS) design has increasingly been advocated as a more robust design to evaluating health system quality improvement (QI) interventions given its ability to control for common biases in healthcare QI. However, there is a potential risk of producing misleading results when this rather robust design is not used appropriately. We performed a methodological systematic review of the literature to investigate the extent to which the use of ITS has followed best practice standards and recommendations in the evaluation of QI interventions. METHODS: We searched multiple databases from inception to June 2018 to identify QI intervention studies that were evaluated using ITS. There was no restriction on date, language and participants. Data were synthesised narratively using appropriate descriptive statistics. The risk of bias for ITS studies was assessed using the Cochrane Effective Practice and Organisation of Care standard criteria. The systematic review protocol was registered in PROSPERO (registration number: CRD42018094427). RESULTS: Of 4061 potential studies and 2028 unique records screened for inclusion, 120 eligible studies assessed eight QI strategies and were from 25 countries. Most studies were published since 2010 (86.7%), reported data using monthly interval (71.4%), used ITS without a control (81%) and modelled data using segmented regression (62.5%). Autocorrelation was considered in 55% of studies, seasonality in 20.8% and non-stationarity in 8.3%. Only 49.2% of studies specified the ITS impact model. The risk of bias was high or very high in 72.5% of included studies and did not change significantly over time. CONCLUSIONS: The use of ITS in the evaluation of health system QI interventions has increased considerably over the past decade. However, variations in methodological considerations and reporting of ITS in QI remain a concern, warranting a need to develop and reinforce formal reporting guidelines to improve its application in the evaluation of health system QI interventions. BMJ Publishing Group 2020-10-14 /pmc/articles/PMC7559052/ /pubmed/33055094 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjgh-2020-003567 Text en © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2020. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited, appropriate credit is given, any changes made indicated, and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/. |
spellingShingle | Original Research Hategeka, Celestin Ruton, Hinda Karamouzian, Mohammad Lynd, Larry D Law, Michael R Use of interrupted time series methods in the evaluation of health system quality improvement interventions: a methodological systematic review |
title | Use of interrupted time series methods in the evaluation of health system quality improvement interventions: a methodological systematic review |
title_full | Use of interrupted time series methods in the evaluation of health system quality improvement interventions: a methodological systematic review |
title_fullStr | Use of interrupted time series methods in the evaluation of health system quality improvement interventions: a methodological systematic review |
title_full_unstemmed | Use of interrupted time series methods in the evaluation of health system quality improvement interventions: a methodological systematic review |
title_short | Use of interrupted time series methods in the evaluation of health system quality improvement interventions: a methodological systematic review |
title_sort | use of interrupted time series methods in the evaluation of health system quality improvement interventions: a methodological systematic review |
topic | Original Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7559052/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33055094 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjgh-2020-003567 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT hategekacelestin useofinterruptedtimeseriesmethodsintheevaluationofhealthsystemqualityimprovementinterventionsamethodologicalsystematicreview AT rutonhinda useofinterruptedtimeseriesmethodsintheevaluationofhealthsystemqualityimprovementinterventionsamethodologicalsystematicreview AT karamouzianmohammad useofinterruptedtimeseriesmethodsintheevaluationofhealthsystemqualityimprovementinterventionsamethodologicalsystematicreview AT lyndlarryd useofinterruptedtimeseriesmethodsintheevaluationofhealthsystemqualityimprovementinterventionsamethodologicalsystematicreview AT lawmichaelr useofinterruptedtimeseriesmethodsintheevaluationofhealthsystemqualityimprovementinterventionsamethodologicalsystematicreview |