Quality Indicators for Hospital Care

Abstract Hospital quality indicators are widely implemented for purposes such as accountability, transparency and the overarching aim of quality improvement. However, it is not clear whether currently used hospital quality indicators actually reflect quality of care. The aim of this thesis was to expand our knowledge on how to measure quality of hospital care with the focus on external comparison. I specifically investigated reliability and validity as these are key aspects of quality indicators. For reliability we focused on data quality, indicator definitions and statistical uncertainty. For the validity we focused on case-mix correction

Influences of hospital information systems, indicator data collection and computation on reported Dutch hospital performance indicator scores

Background: For health care performance indicators (PIs) to be reliable, data underlying the PIs are required to be complete, accurate, consistent and reproducible. Given the lack of regulation of the data-systems used in the Netherlands, and the self-report based indicator scores, one would expect heterogeneity with respect to the data collection and the ways indicators are computed. This might affect the reliability and plausibility of the nationally reported scores. Methods. We aimed to investigate the extent to which local hospital data collection and indicator computation strategies differ and how this affects the plausibility of self-reported indicator scores, using survey results of 42 hospitals and data of the Dutch national quality database. Results: The data collection and indicator computation strategies of the hospitals were substantially heterogenic. Moreover, the Hip and Knee replacement PI scores can be regarded as largely implausible, which was, to a great extent, related to a limited (computerized) data registry. In contrast, Breast Cancer PI scores were more plausible, despite the incomplete data registry and limited data access. This might be explained by the role of the regional cancer centers that collect most of the indicator data for the national cancer registry, in a standardized manner. Hospitals can use cancer registry indicator scores to report to the government, instead of their own locally collected indicator scores. Conclusions: Indicator developers, users and the scientific field need to focus more on the underlying (heterogenic) ways of data collection and conditional data infrastructures. Countries that have a liberal software market and are aiming to implement a self-report based performance indicator system to obtain health care transparency, should secure the accuracy and precision of the heath care data from which the PIs are calculated. Moreover, ongoing research and development of PIs and profound insight in the clinical practice of data registration is warranted

Testing the construct validity of hospital care quality indicators: a case study on hip replacement

BACKGROUND: Quality indicators are increasingly used to measure the quality of care and compare quality across hospitals. In the Netherlands over the past few years numerous hospital quality indicators have been developed and reported. Dutch indicators are mainly based on expert consensus and face validity and little is known about their construct validity. Therefore, we aim to study the construct validity of a set of national hospital quality indicators for hip replacements.METHODS: We used the scores of 100 Dutch hospitals on national hospital quality indicators looking at care delivered over a two year period. We assessed construct validity by relating structure, process and outcome indicators using chi-square statistics, bootstrapped Spearman correlations, and independent sample t-tests. We studied indicators that are expected to associate as they measure the same clinical construct.RESULT: Among the 28 hypothesized correlations, three associations were significant in the direction hypothesized. Hospitals with low scores on wound infections had high scores on scheduling postoperative appointments (p-value = 0.001) and high scores on not transfusing homologous blood (correlation coefficient = -0.28; p-value = 0.05). Hospitals with high scores on scheduling complication meetings, also had high scores on providing thrombosis prophylaxis (correlation coefficient = 0.21; p-value = 0.04).CONCLUSION: Despite the face validity of hospital quality indicators for hip replacement, construct validity seems to be limited. Although the individual indicators might be valid and actionable, drawing overall conclusions based on the whole indicator set should be done carefully, as construct validity could not be established. The factors that may explain the lack of construct validity are poor data quality, no adjustment for case-mix and statistical uncertainty

Oscillations and temporal signalling in cells

ArXiv pre-print: http://arxiv.org/abs/q-bio/0703047.-- Final full-text version of the paper available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/1478-3975/4/2/R01.PMID: 17664651The development of new techniques to quantitatively measure gene expression in cells has shed light on a number of systems that display oscillations in protein concentration. Here we review the different mechanisms which can produce oscillations in gene expression or protein concentration using a framework of simple mathematical models. We focus on three eukaryotic genetic regulatory networks which show ultradian oscillations, with a time period of the order of hours, and involve, respectively, proteins important for development (Hes1), apoptosis (p53) and immune response (NF-κB). We argue that underlying all three is a common design consisting of a negative feedback loop with time delay which is responsible for the oscillatory behaviour.SK, MHJ and KS acknowledge support from the Danish National Research Foundation and Villum Kann Rasmussen Foundation. GT acknowledges support from the FIRB 2003 program of the Italian Ministry for University and Scientific Research

Is the readmission rate a valid quality indicator? A review of the evidence

Conclusions: Although readmission rates are a promising quality indicator, several methodological concerns identified in this study need to be addressed, especially when the indi

Using quality measures for quality improvement: The perspective of hospital staff

Research objective: This study examines the perspectives of a range of key hospital staff on the use, importance, scientific background, availability of data, feasibility of data collection, cost benefit aspects and availability of professional personnel for measurement of quality indicators among Iranian hospitals. The study aims to facilitate the use of quality indicators to improve quality of care in hospitals. Study design: A cross-sectional study was conducted over the period 2009 to 2010. Staff at Iranian hospitals completed a self-administered questionnaire eliciting their views on organizational, clinical process, and outcome (clinical effectiveness, patient safety and patient centeredness) indicators. Population studied: 93 hospital frontline staff including hospital/nursing managers, medical doctors, nurses, and quality improvement/medical records officers in 48 general and specialized hospitals in Iran. Principal findings: On average, only 69% of respondents reported using quality indicators in practice at their affiliated hospitals. Respondents varied significantly in their reported use of organizational, clinical process and outcome quality indicators. Overall, clinical process and effectiveness indicators were reported to be least used. The reported use of indicators corresponded with their perceived level of importance. Quality indicators were reported to be used among clinical staff significantly more than among managerial staff. In total, 74% of the respondents reported to use obligatory indicators, while this was 68% for voluntary indicators (p<0.05). Conclusions: There is a general awareness of the importance and usability of quality indicators among hospital staff in Iran, but their use is currently mostly directed towards external accountability purposes. To increase the formative use of quality indicators, creation of a common culture and feeling of shared ownership, alongside an increased uptake of clinical process and effectiveness indicators is needed to support internal quality improvement processes at hospital level

EEGManyPipelines: A Large-scale, Grassroots Multi-analyst Study of Electroencephalography Analysis Practices in the Wild

The ongoing reproducibility crisis in psychology and cognitive neuroscience has sparked increasing calls to re-evaluate and reshape scientific culture and practices. Heeding those calls, we have recently launched the EEGManyPipelines project as a means to assess the robustness of EEG research in naturalistic conditions and experiment with an alternative model of conducting scientific research. One hundred sixty-eight analyst teams, encompassing 396 individual researchers from 37 countries, independently analyzed the same unpublished, representative EEG data set to test the same set of predefined hypotheses and then provided their analysis pipelines and reported outcomes. Here, we lay out how large-scale scientific projects can be set up in a grassroots, community-driven manner without a central organizing laboratory. We explain our recruitment strategy, our guidance for analysts, the eventual outputs of this project, and how it might have a lasting impact on the field

Swiss residents' arguments for and against a career in medicine

BACKGROUND: In some Western countries, the medical profession is continuously losing prestige, doctors are claiming of high demands, low rewards, and difficult structural working conditions. This study aimed to investigate the arguments given by Swiss residents for and against a career in medicine. METHODS: As part of a prospective cohort study of Swiss medical school graduates on career development, 567 fourth-year residents were asked to answer the free-response item of what arguments there still were in favour of or against a career in medicine. They also indicated whether they would choose the medical profession all over again (yes/no). The statements were transcribed, content categories inductively formulated, and their descriptions written down in a code manual. Arguments were encoded according to the code manual and assigned to eight content categories (Mayring's content analysis). Frequency distributions were given for categories and tested with Chi(2)-tests for differences in gender, speciality fields, and whether or not the respondent would again choose a career in medicine. RESULTS: The 567 participants made 1,640 statements in favour of and 1,703 statements against a career in medicine. The content analysis of the residents' answers yielded eight categories with arguments both for and against a career in medicine. Of all "statements for" responses, 70% fell into the two top-ranking categories of Personal experiences in day-to-day working life (41.2%) and Interpersonal experiences in professional relationships (28.8%). The top-ranking category of the "statements against" arguments was General work-related structural conditions (32%), followed by Social prestige and health-policy aspects (21%). Main arguments in favour of a career in medicine were interdisciplinary challenge, combination of basic sciences and interpersonal concerns, helping suffering people, guarantee of a secure job; arguments against comprised high workload, time pressure, emotional stress, poorly structured continuing education, increasing bureaucracy, work-life imbalance, low income, and decreasing social prestige. The statements revealed few differences depending on gender, medical field, and attitude towards choosing the medical profession again; one out of five young doctors would not do so. CONCLUSION: Residents' chief complaint is deteriorating structural working conditions, including unfavourable work-life balance. Making medicine an attractive profession again will require sustainable changes in health-policy framework and social reward

Children and older adults exhibit distinct sub-optimal cost-benefit functions when preparing to move their eyes and hands

"© 2015 Gonzalez et al. 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 credited"Numerous activities require an individual to respond quickly to the correct stimulus. The provision of advance information allows response priming but heightened responses can cause errors (responding too early or reacting to the wrong stimulus). Thus, a balance is required between the online cognitive mechanisms (inhibitory and anticipatory) used to prepare and execute a motor response at the appropriate time. We investigated the use of advance information in 71 participants across four different age groups: (i) children, (ii) young adults, (iii) middle-aged adults, and (iv) older adults. We implemented 'cued' and 'non-cued' conditions to assess age-related changes in saccadic and touch responses to targets in three movement conditions: (a) Eyes only; (b) Hands only; (c) Eyes and Hand. Children made less saccade errors compared to young adults, but they also exhibited longer response times in cued versus non-cued conditions. In contrast, older adults showed faster responses in cued conditions but exhibited more errors. The results indicate that young adults (18 -25 years) achieve an optimal balance between anticipation and execution. In contrast, children show benefits (few errors) and costs (slow responses) of good inhibition when preparing a motor response based on advance information; whilst older adults show the benefits and costs associated with a prospective response strategy (i.e., good anticipation)