95 research outputs found
No more 'business as usual' with audit and feedback interventions: towards an agenda for a reinvigorated intervention
Background: Audit and feedback interventions in healthcare have been found to be effective, but there has been little progress with respect to understanding their mechanisms of action or identifying their key ‘active ingredients.’
Discussion: Given the increasing use of audit and feedback to improve quality of care, it is imperative to focus further research on understanding how and when it works best. In this paper, we argue that continuing the ‘business as usual’ approach to evaluating two-arm trials of audit and feedback interventions against usual care for common problems and settings is unlikely to contribute new generalizable findings. Future audit and feedback trials should incorporate evidence- and theory-based best practices, and address known gaps in the literature.
Summary: We offer an agenda for high-priority research topics for implementation researchers that focuses on reviewing best practices for designing audit and feedback interventions to optimize effectiveness
Audit and feedback and clinical practice guideline adherence: Making feedback actionable
BACKGROUND: As a strategy for improving clinical practice guideline (CPG) adherence, audit and feedback (A&F) has been found to be variably effective, yet A&F research has not investigated the impact of feedback characteristics on its effectiveness. This paper explores how high performing facilities (HPF) and low performing facilities (LPF) differ in the way they use clinical audit data for feedback purposes. METHOD: Descriptive, qualitative, cross-sectional study of a purposeful sample of six Veterans Affairs Medical Centers (VAMCs) with high and low adherence to six CPGs, as measured by external chart review audits. One-hundred and two employees involved with outpatient CPG implementation across the six facilities participated in one-hour semi-structured interviews where they discussed strategies, facilitators and barriers to implementing CPGs. Interviews were analyzed using techniques from the grounded theory method. RESULTS: High performers provided timely, individualized, non-punitive feedback to providers, whereas low performers were more variable in their timeliness and non-punitiveness and relied on more standardized, facility-level reports. The concept of actionable feedback emerged as the core category from the data, around which timeliness, individualization, non-punitiveness, and customizability can be hierarchically ordered. CONCLUSION: Facilities with a successful record of guideline adherence tend to deliver more timely, individualized and non-punitive feedback to providers about their adherence than facilities with a poor record of guideline adherence. Consistent with findings from organizational research, feedback intervention characteristics may influence the feedback's effectiveness at changing desired behaviors
A hospital-site controlled intervention using audit and feedback to implement guidelines concerning inappropriate treatment of catheter-associated asymptomatic bacteriuria
<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Catheter-associated urinary tract infection (CAUTI) is one of the most common hospital-acquired infections. However, many cases treated as hospital-acquired CAUTI are actually asymptomatic bacteriuria (ABU). Evidence-based guidelines recommend that providers neither screen for nor treat ABU in most catheterized patients, but there is a significant gap between these guidelines and clinical practice. Our objectives are (1) to evaluate the effectiveness of an audit and feedback intervention for increasing guideline-concordant care concerning catheter-associated ABU and (2) to measure improvements in healthcare providers' knowledge of and attitudes toward the practice guidelines associated with the intervention.</p> <p>Methods/Design</p> <p>The study uses a controlled pre/post design to test an intervention using audit and feedback of healthcare providers to improve their compliance with ABU guidelines. The intervention and the control sites are two VA hospitals. For objective 1 we will review medical records to measure the clinical outcomes of inappropriate screening for and treatment of catheter-associated ABU. For objective 2 we will survey providers' knowledge and attitudes. Three phases of our protocol are proposed: the first 12-month phase will involve observation of the baseline incidence of inappropriate screening for and treatment of ABU at both sites. This surveillance for clinical outcomes will continue at both sites throughout the study. Phase 2 consists of 12 months of individualized audit and feedback at the intervention site and guidelines distribution at both sites. The third phase, also over 12 months, will provide unit-level feedback at the intervention site to assess sustainability. Healthcare providers at the intervention site during phase 2 and at both sites during phase 3 will complete pre/post surveys of awareness and familiarity (knowledge), as well as of acceptance and outcome expectancy (attitudes) regarding the relevant practice guidelines.</p> <p>Discussion</p> <p>Our proposal to bring clinical practice in line with published guidelines has significant potential to decrease overdiagnosis of CAUTI and associated inappropriate antibiotic use. Our study will also provide information about how to maximize effectiveness of audit and feedback to achieve guideline adherence in the inpatient setting.</p> <p>Trial Registration</p> <p><a href="http://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01052545">NCT01052545</a></p
Understanding the management of electronic test result notifications in the outpatient setting
<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Notifying clinicians about abnormal test results through electronic health record (EHR) -based "alert" notifications may not always lead to timely follow-up of patients. We sought to understand barriers, facilitators, and potential interventions for safe and effective management of abnormal test result delivery via electronic alerts.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>We conducted a qualitative study consisting of six 6-8 member focus groups (N = 44) at two large, geographically dispersed Veterans Affairs facilities. Participants included full-time primary care providers, and personnel representing diagnostic services (radiology, laboratory) and information technology. We asked participants to discuss barriers, facilitators, and suggestions for improving timely management and follow-up of abnormal test result notifications and encouraged them to consider technological issues, as well as broader, human-factor-related aspects of EHR use such as organizational, personnel, and workflow.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Providers reported receiving a large number of alerts containing information unrelated to abnormal test results, many of which were believed to be unnecessary. Some providers also reported lacking proficiency in use of certain EHR features that would enable them to manage alerts more efficiently. Suggestions for improvement included improving display and tracking processes for critical alerts in the EHR, redesigning clinical workflow, and streamlining policies and procedures related to test result notification.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Providers perceive several challenges for fail-safe electronic communication and tracking of abnormal test results. A multi-dimensional approach that addresses technology as well as the many non-technological factors we elicited is essential to design interventions to reduce missed test results in EHRs.</p
Towards successful coordination of electronic health record based-referrals: a qualitative analysis
<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Successful subspecialty referrals require considerable coordination and interactive communication among the primary care provider (PCP), the subspecialist, and the patient, which may be challenging in the outpatient setting. Even when referrals are facilitated by electronic health records (EHRs) (<it>i.e</it>., e-referrals), lapses in patient follow-up might occur. Although compelling reasons exist why referral coordination <it>should </it>be improved, little is known about which elements of the complex referral coordination process should be targeted for improvement. Using Okhuysen & Bechky's coordination framework, this paper aims to understand the barriers, facilitators, and suggestions for improving communication and coordination of EHR-based referrals in an integrated healthcare system.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>We conducted a qualitative study to understand coordination breakdowns related to e-referrals in an integrated healthcare system and examined work-system factors that affect the timely receipt of subspecialty care. We conducted interviews with seven subject matter experts and six focus groups with a total of 30 PCPs and subspecialists at two tertiary care Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) medical centers. Using techniques from grounded theory and content analysis, we identified organizational themes that affected the referral process.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Four themes emerged: lack of an institutional referral policy, lack of standardization in certain referral procedures, ambiguity in roles and responsibilities, and inadequate resources to adapt and respond to referral requests effectively. Marked differences in PCPs' and subspecialists' communication styles and individual mental models of the referral processes likely precluded the development of a <it>shared </it>mental model to facilitate coordination and successful referral completion. Notably, very few barriers related to the EHR were reported.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>Despite facilitating information transfer between PCPs and subspecialists, e-referrals remain prone to coordination breakdowns. Clear referral policies, well-defined roles and responsibilities for key personnel, standardized procedures and communication protocols, and adequate human resources must be in place before implementing an EHR to facilitate referrals.</p
Clinical Pathway and Monthly Feedback Improve Adherence to Antibiotic Guideline Recommendations for Community-Acquired Pneumonia
Background: Compliance with community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) guidelines remains poor despite a substantial body of evidence indicating that guideline-concordant care improves patient outcomes. The aim of this study was to compare the relative effectiveness of a general educational and a targeted emergency department intervention on improving physicians’ concordance with CAP guidelines.
Methods: Two distinct interventions were implemented over specific time periods. The first intervention was educational, focusing on the development of local CAP guidelines and their dissemination through hospital-wide educational programmes. The second intervention was a targeted one for the emergency department, where a clinical pathway for the initial management of CAP patients was introduced, followed by monthly feedback to the emergency department (ED) physicians about concordance rates with the guidelines. Data on the concordance rate to CAP guidelines was collected from a retrospective chart review.
Results: A total of 398 eligible patient records were reviewed to measure concordance to CAP guidelines over the study period. Concordance rates during the baseline and educational intervention periods were similar (28.1% vs. 31.2%; p > 0.05). Significantly more patients were treated in accordance with the CAP guidelines after the ED focused intervention when compared to the baseline (61.5% vs. 28.1%; p < 0.05) or educational period (61.5% vs. 31.2%; p < 0.05).
Conclusions: A targeted intervention with a CAP clinical pathway and monthly feedback was a successful strategy to increase adherence to empirical antibiotic recommendations in CAP guidelines
Growing Literature, Stagnant Science? Systematic Review, Meta-Regression and Cumulative Analysis of Audit and Feedback Interventions in Health Care
Design, rationale, and baseline characteristics of a cluster randomized controlled trial of pay for performance for hypertension treatment: study protocol
<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Despite compelling evidence of the benefits of treatment and well-accepted guidelines for treatment, hypertension is controlled in less than one-half of United States citizens.</p> <p>Methods/design</p> <p>This randomized controlled trial tests whether explicit financial incentives promote the translation of guideline-recommended care for hypertension into clinical practice and improve blood pressure (BP) control in the primary care setting. Using constrained randomization, we assigned 12 Veterans Affairs hospital outpatient clinics to four study arms: physician-level incentive; group-level incentive; combination of physician and group incentives; and no incentives (control). All participants at the hospital (cluster) were assigned to the same study arm. We enrolled 83 full-time primary care physicians and 42 non-physician personnel. The intervention consisted of an educational session about guideline-recommended care for hypertension, five audit and feedback reports, and five disbursements of incentive payments. Incentive payments rewarded participants for chart-documented use of guideline-recommended antihypertensive medications, BP control, and appropriate responses to uncontrolled BP during a prior four-month performance period over the 20-month intervention. To identify potential unintended consequences of the incentives, the study team interviewed study participants, as well as non-participant primary care personnel and leadership at study sites. Chart reviews included data collection on quality measures not related to hypertension. To evaluate the persistence of the effect of the incentives, the study design includes a washout period.</p> <p>Discussion</p> <p>We briefly describe the rationale for the interventions being studied, as well as the major design choices. Rigorous research designs such as the one described here are necessary to determine whether performance-based payment arrangements such as financial incentives result in meaningful quality improvements.</p> <p>Trial Registration</p> <p><url>http://www.clinicaltrials.gov</url><a href="http://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT00302718">NCT00302718</a></p
Proximity morality in medical school – medical students forming physician morality "on the job": Grounded theory analysis of a student survey
<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>The value of ethics education have been questioned. Therefore we did a student survey on attitudes about the teaching of ethics in Swedish medical schools.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Questionnaire survey on attitudes to ethics education with 409 Swedish medical students participating. We analyzed > 8000 words of open-ended responses and multiple-choice questions using classic grounded theory procedures.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>In this paper we suggest that medical students take a proximity morality stance towards their ethics education meaning that they want to form physician morality "on the job". This involves comprehensive ethics courses in which quality lectures provide "ethics grammar" and together with attitude exercises and vignette reflections nurture tutored group discussions. Goals of forming physician morality are to develop a professional identity, handling diversity of religious and existential worldviews, training students described as ethically naive, processing difficult clinical experiences, and desisting negative role modeling from physicians in clinical or teaching situations, some engaging in "ethics suppression" by controlling sensitive topic discussions and serving students politically correct attitudes.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>We found that medical students have a proximity morality attitude towards ethics education. Rather than being taught ethics they want to form their own physician morality through tutored group discussions in comprehensive ethics courses.</p
Nursing home administrators’ perspectives on a study feedback report : a cross sectional survey
BackgroundThis project is part of the Translating Research in Elder Care (TREC) program of research, a multi-level and longitudinal research program being conducted in 36 nursing homes in three Canadian Prairie Provinces. The overall goal of TREC is to improve the quality of care for older persons living in nursing homes and the quality of work life for care providers. The purpose of this paper is to report on development and evaluation of facility annual reports (FARs) from facility administrators’ perspectives on the usefulness, meaningfulness, and understandability of selected data from the TREC survey. MethodsA cross sectional survey design was used in this study. The feedback reports were developed in collaboration with participating facility administrators. FARs presented results in four contextual areas: workplace culture, feedback processes, job satisfaction, and staff burnout. Six weeks after FARs were mailed to each administrator, we conducted structured telephone interviews with administrators to elicit their evaluation of the FARs. Administrators were also asked if they had taken any actions as a result of the FAR. Descriptive and inferential statistics, as well as content analysis for open-ended questions, were used to summarize findings. ResultsThirty-one facility administrators (representing thirty-two facilities) participated in the interviews. Six administrators had taken action and 18 were planning on taking action as a result of FARs. The majority found the four contextual areas addressed in FAR to be useful, meaningful, and understandable. They liked the comparisons made between data from years one and two and between their facility and other TREC study sites in their province. Twenty-two indicated that they would like to receive information on additional areas such as aggressive behaviours of residents and information sharing. Twenty-four administrators indicated that FARs contained enough information, while eight found FARs ‘too short’. Administrators who reported that the FAR contained enough information were more likely to take action within their facilities than administrators who reported that they needed more information. ConclusionsAlthough the FAR was brief, the presentation of the four contextual areas was relevant to the majority of administrators and prompted them to plan or to take action within their facility. <br /
- …