Niek Sebastian Klazinga

Optimal methods for guideline implementation: conclusions from Leeds Castle meeting.

Background.Quality problems in medical care are not a new finding. Variations in medical practice as well as actual medical errors have been pointed out for many decades. The current movement to write practice guidelines to attempt to correct these deviations from recommended medical practice has not solved the problem. Objectives.In order to gain greater acceptance of these guidelines and to change the behavior of health care providers, the science of guideline implementation must be understood better. Research Design. A group of experts who have studied the problem of implementation in Europe and the United States was convened. This meeting summary enumerates the implementation methods studied to date, reviews the theories of behavioral change, and makes recommendation for effecting better implementation guidelines. Results.A research agenda was proposed to further our knowledge of effective evidence-based implementation.

The Dutch health care performance report: seven years of health care performance assessment in the Netherlands

In 2006, the first edition of a monitoring tool for the performance of the Dutch health care system was released: the Dutch Health Care Performance Report (DHCPR). The Netherlands was among the first countries in the world developing such a comprehensive tool for reporting performance on quality, access, and affordability of health care. The tool contains 125 performance indicators; the choice for specific indicators resulted from a dialogue between researchers and policy makers. In the ‘policy cycle’, the DHCPR can rationally be placed between evaluation (accountability) and agenda-setting (for strategic decision making). In this paper, we reflect on important lessons learned after seven years of health care system performance assessment. These lessons entail the importance of a good conceptual framework for health system performance assessment, the importance of repeated measurement, the strength of combining multiple perspectives (e.g., patient, professional, objective, subjective) on the same issue, the importance of a central role for the patients’ perspective in performance assessment, how to deal with the absence of data in relevant domains, the value of international benchmarking and the continuous exchange between researchers and policy makers.

Application of quality improvement strategies in 389 European hospitals: results of the MARQuIS project

Context: This study was part of the Methods of Assessing Response to Quality Improvement Strategies (MARQuIS) research project investigating the impact of quality improvement strategies on hospital care in various countries of the European Union (EU), in relation to specific needs of cross-border patients. Aim: This paper describes how EU hospitals have applied seven quality improvement strategies previously defined by the MARQuIS study: organisational quality management programmes; systems for obtaining patients’ views; patient safety systems; audit and internal assessment of clinical standards; clinical and practice guidelines; performance indicators; and external assessment. Methods: A web-based questionnaire was used to survey acute care hospitals in eight EU countries. The reported findings were later validated via on-site survey and site visits in a sample of the participating hospitals. Data collection took place from April to August 2006. Results: 389 hospitals participated in the survey; response rates varied per country. All seven quality improvement strategies were widely used in European countries. Activities related to external assessment were the most broadly applied across Europe, and activities related to patient involvement were the least widely implemented. No one country implemented all quality strategies at all hospitals. There were no differences between participating hospitals in western and eastern European countries regarding the application of quality improvement strategies. Conclusions: Implementation varied per country and per quality improvement strategy, leaving considerable scope for progress in quality improvements. The results may contribute to benchmarking activities in European countries, and point to further areas of research to explore the relationship between the application of quality improvement strategies and actual hospital performance.

Transforming medical professionalism to fit changing health needs

BackgroundThe professional organization of medical work no longer reflects the changing health needs caused by the growing number of complex and chronically ill patients. Key stakeholders enforce coordination and remove power from the medical professions in order allow for these changes. However, it may also be necessary to initiate basic changes to way in which the medical professionals work in order to adapt to the changing health needs.DiscussionMedical leaders, supported by health policy makers, can consciously activate the self-regulatory capacity of medical professionalism in order to transform the medical profession and the related professional processes of care so that it can adapt to the changing health needs. In doing so, they would open up additional routes to the improvement of the health services system and to health improvement. This involves three consecutive steps: (1) defining and categorizing the health needs of the population; (2) reorganizing the specialty domains around the needs of population groups; (3) reorganizing the specialty domains by eliminating work that could be done by less educated personnel or by the patients themselves. We suggest seven strategies that are required in order to achieve this transformation.SummaryChanging medical professionalism to fit the changing health needs will not be easy. It will need strong leadership. But, if the medical world does not embark on this endeavour, good doctoring will become merely a bureaucratic and/or marketing exercise that obscures the ultimate goal of medicine which is to optimize the health of both individuals and the entire population.

Is patient-centredness in European hospitals related to existing quality improvement strategies? Analysis of a cross-sectional survey (MARQuIS study)

Background: There is growing recognition of patients’ contributions to setting objectives for their own care, improving health outcomes and evaluating care. Objective: To quantify the extent to which European hospitals have implemented strategies to promote a patient-centred approach, and to assess whether these strategies are associated with hospital characteristics and the development of the hospital’s quality improvement system. Design: Cross-sectional survey of 351 European hospital managers and professionals. Main outcome measures: Patients’ rights, patient information and empowerment, patient involvement in quality management, learning from patients, and patient hotel services at the hospital and ward level were assessed. The hypothesis that the implementation of strategies to improve patient-centredness is associated with hospital characteristics, including maturity of the hospital’s quality management system, was tested using binary logistic regression. Results: In general, hospitals reported high implementation of policies for patients’ rights (85.5%) and informed consent (93%), whereas strategies to involve patients (71%) and learn from their experience (66%) were less frequently implemented. For 13 out of 18 hospital strategies, institutions with a more developed quality improvement system consistently reported better results (percentage differences within maturity classification ranged from 12.4% to 46.6%). The strength of association between implementation of patient-centredness strategies and the quality improvement system, however, seemed lower at the ward than at the hospital level. Some associations (OR 2.1 to 5.1) disappeared or were weaker after adjustment for potential confounding variables (OR 2.2 to 3.7). Conclusions: Although quality improvement systems seem to be effective with regard to the implementation of selected patient-centredness strategies, they seem to be insufficient to ensure widespread implementation of patient-centredness throughout the organisation.

The World Health Organization Performance Assessment Tool for Quality Improvement in Hospitals (PATH): An Analysis of the Pilot Implementation in 37 Hospitals

OBJECTIVE To evaluate the pilot implementation of the World Health Organization Performance Assessment Tool for Quality Improvement in hospitals (PATH). DESIGN Semi-structured interviews with regional/country coordinators and Internet-based survey distributed to hospital coordinators. SETTING A total of 37 hospitals in six regions/countries (Belgium, Ontario (Canada), Denmark, France, Slovakia, KwaZulu Natal (South Africa)). PARTICIPANTS Six PATH regional/country coordinators and 37 PATH hospital coordinators. INTERVENTION Implementation of a hospital performance assessment pilot project. OUTCOME MEASURE Experience of regional/country coordinators (structured interviews) and experience of hospital coordinators (survey) with the pilot implementation. RESULTS The main achievement has been the collection and analysis of data on a set of indicators for comprehensive performance assessment in hospitals in regions and countries with different cultures and resource availability. Both regional/country coordinators and hospital coordinators required seed funding and technical support during data collection for implementation. Based on the user evaluation, we identified the following research and development tasks: further standardization and improved validity of indicators, increased use of routine data, more timely feedback with a stronger focus on international benchmarking and further support on interpretation of results. CONCLUSIONS Key to successful implementation was the embedding of PATH in existing performance measurement initiatives while acknowledging the core objective of the project as a self-improvement tool. The pilot test raised a number of organizational and methodological challenges in the design and implementation of international research on hospital performance assessment. Moreover, the process of evaluating PATH resulted in interesting learning points for other existing and newly emerging quality indicator projects.

Three methods of multi-source feedback compared: a plea for narrative comments and coworkers' perspectives

Background: Doctor performance assessments based on multi-source feedback (MSF) are increasingly central in professional self-regulation. Research has shown that simple MSF is often unproductive. It has been suggested that MSF should be delivered by a facilitator and combined with a portfolio. Aims: To compare three methods of MSF for consultants in the Netherlands and evaluate the feasibility, topics addressed and perceived impact upon clinical practice. Method: In 2007, 38 facilitators and 109 consultants participated in the study. The performance assessment system was composed of (i) one of the three MSF methods, namely, Violatos Physician Achievement Review (PAR), the method developed by Ramsey et al. for the American Board of Internal Medicine (ABIM), or the Dutch Appraisal and Assessment Instrument (AAI), (ii) portfolio, (iii) assessment interview with a facilitator and (iv) personal development plan. The evaluation consisted of a postal survey for facilitators and consultants. Generalized estimating equations were used to assess the association between MSF method used and perceived impact. Results: It takes on average 8 hours to conduct one assessment. The CanMEDS roles ‘collaborator’, ‘communicator’ and ‘manager’ were discussed in, respectively, 79, 74 and 71% of the assessment interviews. The ‘health advocate role’ was the subject of conversation in 35% of the interviews. Consultants are more satisfied with feedback that contains narrative comments. The perceived impact of MSF that includes coworkers’ perspectives significantly exceeds the perceived impact of methods not including this perspective. Conclusions: Performance assessments based on MSF combined with a portfolio and a facilitator-led interview seem to be feasible in hospital settings. The perceived impact of MSF increases when it contains coworkers’ perspectives.

Guideline adherence rates and interprofessional variation in a vignette study of depression

Objective: To assess the appropriateness of and variation in intention-to-treat decisions in the management of depression in the Netherlands. Design: Mailed survey with 22 paper cases (vignettes) based on a population study. Setting: A random sample from four professional groups in the Dutch mental healthcare system. Subjects: 264 general practitioners, psychiatrists, psychotherapists, and clinical psychologists. Main outcome measures: Each vignette contained information on a number of patient characteristics taken from three national depression guidelines. The distribution of patient characteristics was based on data from a population study. Respondents were asked to choose the best treatment option and the best treatment setting. For each vignette we examined which of the selected treatments was appropriate according to the recommendations of the three published Dutch clinical guidelines and a panel of experts. Results: 31% of all intention-to-treat decisions were not consistent with the guidelines. Overall, less severe depression, alcohol abuse, psychotic features, and lack of social resources were related to more inappropriate judgements. There was considerable variation between the professional groups: psychiatrists made more appropriate choices than the other professions although they had the highest rate of overtreatment. Conclusions: There is sufficient variation in the intentions to treat depression to give it priority in quality assessment and guideline development. Efforts to achieve appropriate care should focus on treatment indications, referral patterns, and overtreatment.

Deepening our understanding of quality improvement in Europe (DUQuE): overview of a study of hospital quality management in seven countries

Introduction and Objective This paper provides an overview of the DUQuE (Deepening our Understanding of Quality Improvement in Europe) project, the first study across multiple countries of the European Union (EU) to assess relationships between quality management and patient outcomes at EU level. The paper describes the conceptual framework and methods applied, highlighting the novel features of this study. Design DUQuE was designed as a multi-level cross-sectional study with data collection at hospital, pathway, professional and patient level in eight countries. Setting and Participants We aimed to collect data for the assessment of hospital-wide constructs from up to 30 randomly selected hospitals in each country, and additional data at pathway and patient level in 12 of these 30. Main outcome measures A comprehensive conceptual framework was developed to account for the multiple levels that influence hospital performance and patient outcomes. We assessed hospital-specific constructs (organizational culture and professional involvement), clinical pathway constructs (the organization of care processes for acute myocardial infarction, stroke, hip fracture and deliveries), patient-specific processes and outcomes (clinical effectiveness, patient safety and patient experience) and external constructs that could modify hospital quality (external assessment and perceived external pressure). Results Data was gathered from 188 hospitals in 7 participating countries. The overall participation and response rate were between 75% and 100% for the assessed measures. Conclusions This is the first study assessing relation between quality management and patient outcomes at EU level. The study involved a large number of respondents and achieved high response rates. This work will serve to develop guidance in how to assess quality management and makes recommendations on the best ways to improve quality in healthcare for hospital stakeholders, payers, researchers, and policy makers throughout the EU.

Impact of quality strategies on hospital outputs

Context: This study was part of the Methods of Assessing Response to Quality Improvement Strategies (MARQuIS) research project on patients crossing borders, a study to investigate quality improvement strategies in healthcare systems across the European Union (EU). Aim: To explore the association between the implementation of quality improvement strategies in hospitals and hospitals’ success in meeting defined quality requirements that are considered intermediate outputs of the care process. Methods: Data regarding the implementation of seven quality improvement strategies (accreditation, organisational quality management programmes, audit and internal assessment of clinical standards, patient safety systems, clinical practice guidelines, performance indicators and systems for obtaining patients’ views) and four dimensions of outputs (clinical, safety, patient-centredness and cross-border patient-centredness) were collected from 389 acute care hospitals in eight EU countries using a web-based questionnaire. In a second phase, 89 of these hospitals participated in an on-site audit by independent surveyors. Pearson correlation and linear regression models were used to explore associations and relations between quality improvement strategies and achievement of outputs. Results: Positive associations were found between six internal quality improvement strategies and hospital outputs. The quality improvement strategies could be reasonably subsumed under one latent index which explained about half of their variation. The analysis of outputs concluded that the outputs can also be considered part of a single construct. The findings indicate that the implementation of internal as well as external quality improvement strategies in hospitals has beneficial effects on the hospital outputs studied here. Conclusion: The implementation of internal quality improvement strategies as well as external assessment systems should be promoted.