Building patient participation in quality of care through the healthcare stories project: A demonstration program in New York State HIV clinics

There is growing recognition that patients should play a central role in defining, assessing, and improving the quality of healthcare, thereby enhancing patient experiences. Healthcare organizations struggle to meet these goals, which require becoming more patient-centered and patient-involved. The Healthcare Stories Project (HCSP), a demonstration program of the NYS Department of Health AIDS Institute, aimed to address this. HCSP comprises three, stepwise activities to: 1) Capture how patients define and experience ‘quality of care’ in the clinic; 2) Engage patients and providers as equal partners in understanding and improving the quality of care; and through partnerships, 3) Support the building of a coproduced healthcare system. After reviewing HCSP and its rollout in New York HIV outpatient settings, we describe a qualitative process evaluation, consisting of interviews at two time points with implementing organizations (N=12, 11). Each activity offered an opportunity to share ideas and experiences of quality of care, generating concrete improvement project ideas. Activities strengthened patient involvement by engaging consumer advisory boards, and staff not traditionally involved in quality. While designed to be implemented with HIV patients, organizations implemented Activity Two and Three with broader populations. Organizations had the hardest time implementing Activity Three that focused on the coproduction concept, but they none the less applied and strengthened coproduced healthcare during Activities One and Two. Overall, HCSP is a promising model to advance patient-centered and patient-partnered quality of care, better understanding patient experiences and acting with patients to develop practical improvements and a more coproduced healthcare system. Experience Framework This article is associated with the Quality & Clinical Excellence lens of The Beryl Institute Experience Framework (https://www.theberylinstitute.org/ExperienceFramework). Access other PXJ articles related to this lens. Access other resources related to this lens

Adapting improvements to context: when, why and how?

There is evidence that practitioners applying quality improvements often adapt the improvement method or the change they are implementing, either unknowingly, or intentionally to fit their service or situation. This has been observed especially in programs seeking to spread or ‘scale up’ an improvement change to other services. Sometimes their adaptations result in improved outcomes, sometimes they do not, and sometimes they do not have data make this assessment or to describe the adaptation. The purpose of this paper is to summarize key points about adaptation and context discussed at the Salzburg Global Seminar in order to help improvers judge when and how to adapt an improvement change. It aims also to encourage more research into such adaptations to develop our understanding of the when, why and how of effective adaptation and to provide more research informed guidance to improvers. The paper gives examples to illustrate key issues in adaptation and to consider more systematic and purposeful adaptation of improvements so as to increase the chances of achieving improvements in different settings for different participants. We describe methods for assessing whether adaptation is necessary or likely to reduce the effectiveness of an improvement intervention, which adaptations might be required, and methods for collecting data to assess whether the adaptations are successful. We also note areas where research is most needed in order to enable more effective scale up of quality improvements changes and wider take up and use of the methods

Effective management of district-level malaria control and elimination: Implementing quality and participative process improvements

Although it is widely recognized that strong program management is essential to achieving better health outcomes, this priority is not recognized in malaria programmatic practices. Increased management precision offers the opportunity to improve the effectiveness of malaria interventions, overcoming operational barriers to intervention coverage and accelerating the path to elimination. Here we propose a combined approach involving quality improvement, quality management, and participative process improvement, which we refer to as Combined Quality and Process Improvement (CQPI), to improve upon malaria program management. We draw on evidence from other areas of public health, as well as pilot implementation studies in Eswatini, Namibia and Zimbabwe to support the proposal. Summaries of the methodological approaches employed in the pilot studies, overview of activities and an outline of lessons learned from the implementation of CQPI are provided. Our findings suggest that a malaria management strategy that prioritizes quality and participative process improvements at the district-level can strengthen teamwork and communication while enabling the empowerment of subnational staff to solve service delivery challenges. Despite the promise of CQPI, however, policy makers and donors are not aware of its potential. Investments are therefore needed to allow CQPI to come to fruition

Building a tuberculosis-free world: The Lancet Commission on tuberculosis

___Key messages___ The Commission recommends five priority investments to achieve a tuberculosis-free world within a generation. These investments are designed to fulfil the mandate of the UN High Level Meeting on tuberculosis. In addition, they answer

Defining a high performance healthcare organisation

Composite measures of performance are insufficient on their ow

Evaluation and Management of Early HIV Infection

XII+196hlm.;22c

Development of the National Policy for Quality in Healthcare for Malaysia.

BACKGROUND: Quality in healthcare is a fundamental pillar of health systems performance, leading to improved health outcomes and reduced waste. The World Health Organization recommends that countries establish a national quality policy and strategy (NQPS) to steer the provision of safe and high-performing healthcare services and foster a quality culture. This paper describes the development process and key content of Malaysias new 5-year National Policy for Quality in Healthcare. METHODS: The development process was managed by a technical working group led by the Institute for Health Systems Research in the Ministry of Health. Situational analysis was conducted through a multi-pronged approach, underpinned by a review of the past and present healthcare sectoral and quality plans and guided by the WHO NQPS framework. This approach involved: (i) review of quality-related policy documents, (ii) online surveys of healthcare providers and the public, (iii) key-informant facilitated discussions and (iv) mapping of existing quality improvement initiatives (QIIs). Data gathered from these approaches informed the content of the new policy. Following thematic analysis, the findings were grouped into specific domains, which were then organized into a strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats (SWOT) framework. RESULTS: Ten key areas of concern identified were (i) a people-centred holistic approach, (ii) governance for quality, (iii) resources, (iv) quality culture, (v) stakeholder engagement, (vi) health management information system, (vii) workforce competency, (viii) knowledge exchange, (ix) quality indicators and (x) monitoring and evaluation of quality activities. These led to the formulation of seven strategic priorities  for the planning of improvements aimed at addressing the key areas of concern. The national definition of quality was affirmed. A total of 40 QIIs were mapped and grouped into three broad categories, namely (i) regulatory, (ii) domain-specific QIIs and (iii) Quality Improvement (QI) method. CONCLUSIONS: The National Policy for Quality in Healthcare for Malaysia was developed through a comprehensive situational analysis using a multi-method approach that identified priorities across national, state, institutional and community levels. This evidence-informed approach led to meaningful contextual adaptation of the NQPS framework to shape the strategic direction to advance quality and achieve effective and safe outcomes for all Malaysians