Catherine Grenier

Barriers to staff adoption of a surgical safety checklist

Objective Implementation of a surgical checklist depends on many organisational factors and on socio-cultural patterns. The objective of this study was to identify barriers to effective implementation of a surgical checklist and to develop a best use strategy. Setting 18 cancer centres in France. Design The authors first assessed use compliance and completeness rates of the surgical checklist on a random sample of 80 surgical procedures performed under general or loco-regional anaesthesia in each of the 18 centres. They then developed a typology of the organisational and cultural barriers to effective checklist implementation and defined each barriers contents using data from collective and semi-structured individual interviews of key staff, the results of an email questionnaire sent to the 18 centres, and direct observations over 20 h in two centres. Results The study consisted of 1440 surgical procedures, 1299 checklists, and 28 578 items. The mean compliance rate was 90.2% (0, 100). The mean completion rate was 61% (0, 84). 11 barriers to effective checklist implementation were identified. Their incidence varied widely across centres. The main barriers were duplication of items within existing checklists (16/18 centres), poor communication between surgeon and anaesthetist (10/18), time spent completing the checklist for no perceived benefit, and lack of understanding and timing of item checks (9/18), ambiguity (8/18), unaccounted risks (7/18) and a time-honoured hierarchy (6/18). Conclusions Several of the barriers to the successful implementation of the surgical checklist depended on organisational and cultural factors within each centre. The authors propose a strategy for change for checklist design, use and assessment, which could be used to construct a feedback loop for local team organisation and national initiatives.

How to limit the burden of data collection for Quality Indicators based on medical records? The COMPAQH experience

BackgroundOur objective was to limit the burden of data collection for Quality Indicators (QIs) based on medical records.MethodsThe study was supervised by the COMPAQH project. Four QIs based on medical records were tested: medical record conformity; traceability of pain assessment; screening for nutritional disorders; time elapsed before sending copy of discharge letter to the general practitioner. Data were collected by 6 Clinical Research Assistants (CRAs) in a panel of 36 volunteer hospitals and analyzed by COMPAQH. To limit the burden of data collection, we used the same sample of medical records for all 4 QIs, limited sample size to 80 medical records, and built a composite score of only 10 items to assess medical record completeness. We assessed QI feasibility by completing a grid of 19 potential problems and evaluating time spent. We assessed reliability (κ coefficient) as well as internal consistency (Cronbach α coefficient) in an inter-observer study, and discriminatory power by analysing QI variability among hospitals.ResultsOverall, 23 115 data items were collected for the 4 QIs and analyzed. The average time spent on data collection was 8.5 days per hospital. The most common feasibility problem was misunderstanding of the item by hospital staff. QI reliability was good (κ: 0.59–0.97 according to QI). The hospitals differed widely in their ability to meet the quality criteria (mean value: 19–85%).ConclusionThese 4 QIs based on medical records can be used to compare the quality of record keeping among hospitals while limiting the burden of data collection, and can therefore be used for benchmarking purposes. The French National Health Directorate has included them in the new 2009 version of the accreditation procedure for healthcare organizations.

Can we simplify the hospital accreditation process? Predicting accreditation decisions from a reduced dataset of focus priority standards and quality indicators: results of predictive modelling.

Objectives Accreditation in France relies on a mandatory 4-year cycle of self-assessment and a peer review of 82 standards, among which 14 focus priority standards (FPS). Hospitals are also required to measure yearly quality indicators (QIs—5 in 2010). On advice given by the accreditation committee of HAS (Haute Autorité en Santé), based on surveyors proposals and relying mostly on compliance to standards, accreditation decisions are taken by the board of HAS. Accreditation is still perceived by hospitals as a burdensome process and a simplification would be welcomed. The hypothesis was that a more limited number of criteria might give sufficient amount of information on hospitals overall quality level, appraised today by accreditation decisions. Design The accuracy of predictions of accreditation decisions given by a model, Partial Least Square-2 Discriminant Analysis (PLS2-DA), using only the results of FPS and QIs was measured. Accreditation decisions (full accreditation (A), recommendations or reservation (B), remit decision or non-accreditation (C)), results of FPS and QIs were considered qualitative variables. Stability was assessed by leave one out cross validation (LOOCV). Setting and participants All French 489 acute care organisations (ACO) accredited between June 2010 and January 2012 were considered, 304 of them having a rehabilitation care sector (RCS). Results Accuracy of prediction of accreditation decisions was good (89% of ACOs and 91% of ACO-RCS well classified). Stability of results appeared satisfactory when using LOOCV (87% of ACOs and 89% of ACO-RCS well classified). Identification of worse hospitals was correct (90% of ACOs and 97% of ACO-RCS predicted C were actually C). Conclusions Using PLS2-DA with a limited number of criteria (QIs and FPS) provides an accurate prediction of accreditation decisions, especially for underperforming hospitals. This could support accreditation committees which give advices on accreditation decisions, and allow fast-track handling of ‘safe’ reports.

Suitability of three indicators measuring the quality of coordination within hospitals

BackgroundCoordination within hospitals is a major attribute of medical care and influences quality of care. This study tested the validity of 3 indicators covering two key aspects of coordination: the transfer of written information between professionals (medical record content, radiology exam order) and the holding of multidisciplinary team meetings during treatment planning.MethodsThe study was supervised by the French health authorities (COMPAQH project). Data for the three indicators were collected in a panel of 30 to 60 volunteer hospitals by 6 Clinical Research Assistants. The metrological qualities of the indicators were assessed: (i) Feasibility was assessed using a grid of 19 potential problems, (ii) Inter-observer reliability was given by the kappa coefficient () and internal consistency by Cronbachs alpha test, (iii) Discriminatory power was given by an analysis of inter-hospital variability using the Gini coefficient as a measure of dispersion.ResultsOverall, 19281 data items were collected and analyzed. All three indicators presented acceptable feasibility and reliability (, 0.59 to 0.97) and showed wide differences among hospitals (Gini, 0.08 to 0.11), indicating that they are suitable for making comparisons among hospitals.ConclusionThis set of 3 indicators provides a proxy measurement of coordination. Further research on the indicators is needed to find out how they can generate a learning process. The medical record indicator has been included in the French national accreditation procedure for healthcare organisations. The two other indicators are currently being assessed for inclusion.

Hospital Case Volume and Appropriate Prescriptions at Hospital Discharge After Acute Myocardial Infarction A Nationwide Assessment

Background— In acute myocardial infarction, the relationship between volume and quality indicators (QIs) is poorly documented. Through a nationwide assessment of QIs at discharge repeated for 3 years, we aimed to quantify the relationship between volume and QIs in survivors after acute myocardial infarction. Methods and Results— Almost all healthcare centers in France participated. Medical records were randomly selected. Data collection was performed by an independent group. QIs for acute myocardial infarction were defined by an expert consensus group as appropriate prescription at discharge of aspirin, clopidogrel, &bgr;-blocker, statin, and an angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor in patients with left ventricular ejection fraction <0.40. A composite QI was calculated through the use of the all-or-none method. Volume was classified into 7 categories based on the number of admissions for acute myocardial infarctions in 2008 (centers with <10 acute myocardial infarctions were excluded). Odds ratios adjusted for age and sex with 95% confidence interval for volume categories were calculated by use of logistic regression for each QI. Temporal changes were tested in centers that participated in all 3 campaigns. A total of 46 390 records were examined: 18 159 in 2008, 12 837 in 2009, and 15 394 in 2010. Two hundred ninety-one centers were eligible for the temporal analysis. There was a significant increase between 2008 and 2009 in appropriate prescription of antiplatelet agents, &bgr;-blockers, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor, statins at discharge, and the composite indicator. Similarly, a significant increase was observed between 2009 and 2010 in appropriate prescription of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor and &bgr;-blockers and in the composite QI. Compared with a volume of >300, a significantly lower rate of all QIs was observed in centers with the lowest volume. Odds ratios progressively decreased with increasing volume. Despite a significant increase in the composite QI over the 3 years, a significant relationship persisted between volume and quality of care. Conclusions— Analysis of QIs at discharge demonstrates the existence of a relationship between volume and appropriate prescriptions at discharge. Centers with the highest volume perform better on quality measures than centers with lower volumes. Temporal analysis over 3 consecutive years confirms this relationship and shows that it persists despite improvement in QIs between 2008 and 2010.

Mandatory national quality improvement systems using indicators: An initial assessment in Europe and Israel

INTRODUCTION Quality improvement systems (QIS) that are based on empirical performance assessment have increasingly been implemented as a mandatory part of health systems across countries. This study aims to describe national mandatory QIS in Europe in 2014. MATERIALS AND METHODS Relevant national agencies for national mandatory QIS in Europe were identified through online searches and key informants. A questionnaire was compiled during a workshop with these agencies and filled out by representatives from these particular agencies. RESULTS Agencies in charge of national mandatory QIS in seven countries (Denmark, France, Germany, Israel, Scotland, Sweden and Switzerland) were included in the study. An analysis of QIS revealed similarities, such as the use of routine data for performance assessment and the aim to hold healthcare providers accountable. Differences relate to the different forms of feedback systems and improvement mechanisms used. Trends include the development towards greater implementation of QIS within health systems, the inclusion of the patients perspective in performance assessment, and experiments with pay for performance-related measures. CONCLUSION On a country level, for health systems striving for newly implementing QIS it is recommended to start where routine data is available, add qualitative methodologies once the QIS is getting more complex, report performance data back to service providers and be patient centred. On the inter-country level exchange of information between agencies commissioned with implementing national QIS is very much needed for.

La politique nationale des indicateurs de qualité et de sécurité des soins

THE NATIONAL POLICY OF CARE QUALITY AND SAFETY INDICATORS Care quality and safety indicators, piloted by the national health authority, are tools forming part of a global programme of improvement of quality and safety of care. The national scheme for measuring the quality and safety of care provides, for all healthcare facilities, dashboards for managing care quality and safety. Currently focused on the public and private hospital sector, it needs to evolve to widen its scope to include community care and the medical-social sector.