Cargando…

A mixed-methods study of challenges experienced by clinical teams in measuring improvement

OBJECTIVE: Measurement is an indispensable element of most quality improvement (QI) projects, but it is undertaken to variable standards. We aimed to characterise challenges faced by clinical teams in undertaking measurement in the context of a safety QI programme that encouraged local selection of...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Woodcock, Thomas, Liberati, Elisa G, Dixon-Woods, Mary
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BMJ Publishing Group 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7841469/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31446424
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjqs-2018-009048
_version_ 1783643814572851200
author Woodcock, Thomas
Liberati, Elisa G
Dixon-Woods, Mary
author_facet Woodcock, Thomas
Liberati, Elisa G
Dixon-Woods, Mary
author_sort Woodcock, Thomas
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVE: Measurement is an indispensable element of most quality improvement (QI) projects, but it is undertaken to variable standards. We aimed to characterise challenges faced by clinical teams in undertaking measurement in the context of a safety QI programme that encouraged local selection of measures. METHODS: Drawing on an independent evaluation of a multisite improvement programme (Safer Clinical Systems), we combined a qualitative study of participating teams’ experiences and perceptions of measurement with expert review of measurement plans and analysis of data collected for the programme. Multidisciplinary teams of frontline clinicians at nine UK NHS sites took part across the two phases of the programme between 2011 and 2016. RESULTS: Developing and implementing a measurement plan against which to assess their improvement goals was an arduous task for participating sites. The operational definitions of the measures that they selected were often imprecise or missed important details. Some measures used by the teams were not logically linked to the improvement actions they implemented. Regardless of the specific type of data used (routinely collected or selected ex novo), the burdensome nature of data collection was underestimated. Problems also emerged in identifying and using suitable analytical approaches. CONCLUSION: Measurement is a highly technical task requiring a degree of expertise. Simply leveraging individual clinicians’ motivation is unlikely to defeat the persistent difficulties experienced by clinical teams when attempting to measure their improvement efforts. We suggest that more structural initiatives and broader capability-building programmes should be pursued by the professional community. Improving access to, and ability to use repositories of validated measures, and increasing transparency in reporting measurement attempts, is likely to be helpful.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7841469
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher BMJ Publishing Group
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-78414692021-02-04 A mixed-methods study of challenges experienced by clinical teams in measuring improvement Woodcock, Thomas Liberati, Elisa G Dixon-Woods, Mary BMJ Qual Saf Original Research OBJECTIVE: Measurement is an indispensable element of most quality improvement (QI) projects, but it is undertaken to variable standards. We aimed to characterise challenges faced by clinical teams in undertaking measurement in the context of a safety QI programme that encouraged local selection of measures. METHODS: Drawing on an independent evaluation of a multisite improvement programme (Safer Clinical Systems), we combined a qualitative study of participating teams’ experiences and perceptions of measurement with expert review of measurement plans and analysis of data collected for the programme. Multidisciplinary teams of frontline clinicians at nine UK NHS sites took part across the two phases of the programme between 2011 and 2016. RESULTS: Developing and implementing a measurement plan against which to assess their improvement goals was an arduous task for participating sites. The operational definitions of the measures that they selected were often imprecise or missed important details. Some measures used by the teams were not logically linked to the improvement actions they implemented. Regardless of the specific type of data used (routinely collected or selected ex novo), the burdensome nature of data collection was underestimated. Problems also emerged in identifying and using suitable analytical approaches. CONCLUSION: Measurement is a highly technical task requiring a degree of expertise. Simply leveraging individual clinicians’ motivation is unlikely to defeat the persistent difficulties experienced by clinical teams when attempting to measure their improvement efforts. We suggest that more structural initiatives and broader capability-building programmes should be pursued by the professional community. Improving access to, and ability to use repositories of validated measures, and increasing transparency in reporting measurement attempts, is likely to be helpful. BMJ Publishing Group 2021-02 2019-08-24 /pmc/articles/PMC7841469/ /pubmed/31446424 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjqs-2018-009048 Text en © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2021. Re-use permitted under CC BY. Published by BMJ. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 Unported (CC BY 4.0) license, which permits others to copy, redistribute, remix, transform and build upon this work for any purpose, provided the original work is properly cited, a link to the licence is given, and indication of whether changes were made. See: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
spellingShingle Original Research
Woodcock, Thomas
Liberati, Elisa G
Dixon-Woods, Mary
A mixed-methods study of challenges experienced by clinical teams in measuring improvement
title A mixed-methods study of challenges experienced by clinical teams in measuring improvement
title_full A mixed-methods study of challenges experienced by clinical teams in measuring improvement
title_fullStr A mixed-methods study of challenges experienced by clinical teams in measuring improvement
title_full_unstemmed A mixed-methods study of challenges experienced by clinical teams in measuring improvement
title_short A mixed-methods study of challenges experienced by clinical teams in measuring improvement
title_sort mixed-methods study of challenges experienced by clinical teams in measuring improvement
topic Original Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7841469/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31446424
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjqs-2018-009048
work_keys_str_mv AT woodcockthomas amixedmethodsstudyofchallengesexperiencedbyclinicalteamsinmeasuringimprovement
AT liberatielisag amixedmethodsstudyofchallengesexperiencedbyclinicalteamsinmeasuringimprovement
AT dixonwoodsmary amixedmethodsstudyofchallengesexperiencedbyclinicalteamsinmeasuringimprovement
AT woodcockthomas mixedmethodsstudyofchallengesexperiencedbyclinicalteamsinmeasuringimprovement
AT liberatielisag mixedmethodsstudyofchallengesexperiencedbyclinicalteamsinmeasuringimprovement
AT dixonwoodsmary mixedmethodsstudyofchallengesexperiencedbyclinicalteamsinmeasuringimprovement