Quality improvement versus quality assurance?

These suggestions for applications of QI philosophies and considerations for structural integration of QA and QI are not intended to convey that organizationwide adoption of QI merely involves use of QI tools and techniques, or that instilling QI philosophy in an organization is easily accomplished. Achieving continuous quality improvement on an organizationwide basis requires long-term, senior-level commitment, extensive training, adoption of the philosophies at all management levels, and behavioral and cultural change within the organization. The adoption of QI methods and philosophies in health care organizations does not preclude the use of or eliminate the need for QA approaches. Quality improvement and quality assurance are complementary endeavors for attaining continual improvement in health care quality. Improvement of the quality of care provided is and always has been the fundamental goal of health care quality assurance. Attainment of that goal can be advanced through building on the strengths of traditional quality assurance efforts and adopting philosophies and methods of quality improvement as the core forces of total quality management programs.     

Institutionalization of quality improvement programs in Korean hospitals.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the institutionalization of quality improvement (QI) programs in Korean hospitals, in which organizational efforts to improve the quality of care have been made only recently. DESIGN: A cross-sectional study based upon an initial telephone contact and follow-up mail survey. STUDY PARTICIPANTS: All hospitals with 400 beds or more, 100 as of 1997, were contacted in the initial telephone survey. The survey questionnaire was then sent to all of 28 hospitals found to have a QI department; 26 hospitals returned the completed questionnaire. RESULTS: Hospitals that had larger bed capacities, that provided tertiary levels of care or that were in urban areas were found to have a higher tendency to establish QI departments. These QI departments most frequently cited improvement of patient satisfaction as one of their overall missions. They also reported that their most important responsibilities were monitoring performance and preparing for the two national Korean hospital assessment programs. Participating in these hospital assessment programs helped them to initiate and develop their QI activities. The main difficulties they had in performing their QI programs stemmed from lack of knowledge and resources. These survey findings indicate that hospital assessment programs significantly aided Korean hospitals to institutionalize their QI programs. At the same time, the survey data indicate that the hospital assessment programs may emphasize short-term benefits from QI activities at the expense of long-term QI institutionalization. CONCLUSION: QI programs have not as yet been fully institutionalized in Korean hospitals. More support for QI structure and organizational preparation at both the national and organizational levels will be needed.     

Hospice quality improvement programs: an initial examination

Recognizing that little is known about use of quality improvement (QI) processes to enhance care of the dying, 11 large hospices exchanged information about their QI programs. These hospices reported monitoring from 3 to 50 outcomes measured by various indicators and methods. Agencies that related QI to their organization's mission, goals, and strategic plan were more likely to have dedicated QI staff; a more intense, comprehensive, and participatory QI program; and more QI projects resulting in performance enhancement. Both accomplishments and difficulties were identified in several areas, including establishing benchmarks, involving staff, and using computer technology to manage and analyze QI data.     

Quality improvement and the need for IRB review

Improving health care quality is increasingly recognized as a national priority in the United States. As a result, more and more health care organizations can be expected to undertake quality improvement (QI) initiatives. A question being raised with increasing frequency is: "Which QI activities need review by an institutional review board (IRB)?" Structured data collection and analysis is a common characteristic of most QI activities. For some QI projects, the fundamental goal is improved understanding of phenomena presumed to be generalizable to settings other than those directly studied. These activities are research. For other projects, the fundamental goal is improvement in specific processes and systems within specific organizations. These activities are not research. This article proposes that this difference in intent and the fundamental nature of the activity is crucial in deciding which QI initiatives need IRB review. The article presents test questions and markers to distinguish research from other types of QI activities. Those that are not research do not require IRB review. However, because such activities may still put patients at risk, some other review may be necessary. The article proposes five levels of risk and makes recommendations for review by an entity other than the IRB.     

Evaluation and Treatment of Depression in Managed Care (Part II)

Depression is under-detected, but is treatable and relapses can be prevented. Living with depression, whether acute or chronic, has consequences for quality of life, premature end of life, and productive life. Thoughtful and strategic quality improvement (QI) programs offer one avenue for improving the treatment of depression. Part I of this two-part series addresses improving the treatment of depression and employing disease management as a strategy to accomplish that aim. This article, part II, provides an overview of other QI initiatives that demonstrated treatment effectiveness for depression, including several used in managed care practice.Currently, the majority of QI programs for depression target adult patients; therefore, there are future challenges ahead as managed care attempts to address the needs of special populations, such as adolescents and older adults. Public education, professional education, and population-based interventions are also considerations as part of successful treatment. Although consumer-based interventions are typically more expensive, they may ultimately yield the best results for improving depression care for the consumer and payors based on available research. The success of a consumer-centric approach is highly reliant on the person’s engagement with QI programs, the treating clinician’s appreciation and support of such depression programs, and managed care’s response to solving quality problems using continuous monitoring, evaluation, feedback, system enhancements, and training. Models of collaboration between consumers and medical and behavioral health systems offer the most promising approaches to care improvements for patients with depression.     

Understanding team-based quality improvement for depression in primary care

OBJECTIVE: To assess the impacts of the characteristics of quality improvement (QI) teams and their environments on team success in designing and implementing high quality, enduring depression care improvement programs in primary care (PC) practices. STUDY SETTING/DATA SOURCES: Two nonprofit managed care organizations sponsored five QI teams tasked with improving care for depression in large PC practices. Data on characteristics of the teams and their environments is from observer process notes, national expert ratings, administrative data, and interviews. STUDY DESIGN: Comparative formative evaluation of the quality and duration of implementation of the depression improvement programs developed by Central Teams (CTs) emphasizing expert design and Local Teams (LTs) emphasizing participatory local clinician design, and of the effects of additional team and environmental factors on each type of team. Both types of teams depended upon local clinicians for implementation. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: The CT intervention program designs were more evidence-based than those of LTs. Expert team leadership, support from local practice management, and support from local mental health specialists strongly influenced the development of successful team programs. The CTs and LTs were equally successful when these conditions could be met, but CTs were more successful than LTs in less supportive environments. CONCLUSIONS: The LT approach to QI for depression requires high local support and expertise from primary care and mental health clinicians. The CT approach is more likely to succeed than the LT approach when local practice conditions are not optimal.     

Targeting quality improvement activities for depression. Implications of using administrative data

BACKGROUND: Large health care organizations may use administrative data to target primary care patients with depression for quality improvement (QI) activities. However, little is known about the patients who would be identified by these data or the types of QI activities they might need. We describe the clinical characteristics and outcomes of patients identified through administrative data in 2 family practice clinics. METHODS: Patients with depression aged 18 to 65 years were identified through review of encounter/administrative data during a 16-month period. Patients agreeing to participate (N=103) were interviewed with the Primary Care Evaluation of Mental Disorders questionnaire and completed the Depression Outcomes Modules (with an embedded Medical Outcomes Short Form-36 [SF-36]), Symptom Check List-25 (SCL-25), and Alcohol use Disorders Identification Test. Follow-up assessments were completed by 83 patients at a median of 7 months. RESULTS: A large majority of identified patients (85%) met full criteria for a Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders depressive disorder; those not meeting criteria usually had high levels of symptoms on the SCL-25. Seventy-seven percent of the patients reported recurrent episodes of depressed mood, and 60% reported chronic depression. Although most improved at follow-up, they continued to have substantial functional deficits on the SF-36, and 60% still had high levels of depressive symptoms. CONCLUSIONS: QI programs that use administrative data to identify primary care patients with depression will select a cohort with relatively severe, recurrent depressive disorders. Most of these patients will receive standard treatments without QI interventions and will continue to be symptomatic. QI programs targeting this population may need to offer intensive alternatives rather than monitor standard care.     

Challenges of Using Quality Improvement Methods in Nursing Homes that “Need Improvement”

ObjectivesQualitatively describe the adoption of strategies and challenges experienced by intervention facilities participating in a study targeted to improve quality of care in nursing homes “in need of improvement”. To describe how staff use federal quality indicator/quality measure (QI/QM) scores and reports, quality improvement methods and activities, and how staff supported and sustained the changes recommended by their quality improvement teams.Design/setting/participantsA randomized, two-group, repeated-measures design was used to test a 2-year intervention for improving quality of care and resident outcomes in facilities in “need of improvement”. Intervention group (n = 29) received an experimental multilevel intervention designed to help them: (1) use quality-improvement methods, (2) use team and group process for direct-care decision-making, (3) focus on accomplishing the basics of care, and (4) maintain more consistent nursing and administrative leadership committed to communication and active participation of staff in decision-making.ResultsA qualitative analysis revealed a subgroup of homes likely to continue quality improvement activities and readiness indicators of homes likely to improve: (1) a leadership team (nursing home administrator, director of nurses) interested in learning how to use their federal QI/QM reports as a foundation for improving resident care and outcomes; (2) one of the leaders to be a “change champion” and make sure that current QI/QM reports are consistently printed and shared monthly with each nursing unit; (3) leaders willing to involve all staff in the facility in educational activities to learn about the QI/QM process and the reports that show how their facility compares with others in the state and nation; (4) leaders willing to plan and continuously educate new staff about the MDS and federal QI/QM reports and how to do quality improvement activities; (5) leaders willing to continuously involve all staff in quality improvement committee and team activities so they “own” the process and are responsible for change.ConclusionsResults of this qualitative analysis can help allocate expert nurse time to facilities that are actually ready to improve. Wide-spread adoption of this intervention is feasible and could be enabled by nursing home medical directors in collaborative practice with advanced practice nurses.     

A local health department's journey to the summit: a case study of a decade of quality improvement

As the interest in quality improvement (QI) efforts in public health agencies gathers momentum, organizations looking to initiate or strengthen QI processes may benefit from learning about existing programs. This article serves as a case study for other agencies to consider as they embark upon their QI journey. Specifically, this article reviews more than a decade of QI efforts in a mid-sized local health department and highlights areas of success (including an annual QI summit), barriers to implementation of QI, and areas needing improvement.     

Up close and (inter)personal: insights from a primary care practice's efforts to improve office relationships over time, 2003-2009

A growing body of literature suggests that interpersonal relationships between personnel in health care organizations can have an impact on the quality of care provided. Some research recommends that the fundamental practice transformation that is being urged in this current climate of health care reform may be aided by strong interpersonal practice relationships and communication. There is much to be learned, however, about what is involved in the process of addressing and improving interpersonal relationships in primary care practices. This case study offers insights into this process by examining 1 primary care practice's efforts to address interpersonal office issues over the course of its participation in 2 back-to-back quality improvement (QI) intervention studies. Our analysis is based on extensive qualitative data on this practice (observational data, interviews, and audio-recorded QI meetings) from 2003 to 2009. By tracing common themes and patterns of interaction over an extended period of time, we identify a variety of facilitators of and barriers to addressing interpersonal issues in the practice setting. We conclude by suggesting some implications from this case for future QI research.     

Balancing participation and expertise: a comparison of locally and centrally managed health care quality improvement within primary care practices

In a longitudinal qualitative study, the authors evaluated two health care quality improvement (QI) methods that emphasized either participation (local approach) or expertise (central approach). They followed teams using these approaches to develop depression care QI programs for primary care practices over several years, observing their processes and outcomes and learning about participants' perceptions, beliefs, and experiences. Concordant with the literature, most participants preferred the local approach, but some were willing to relinquish some decision making to experts. Participants identified unique advantages of both the local (e.g., maximizes buy-in and local fit) and central (e.g., maximizes efficiency, reduces burden) approaches. The authors propose a hybrid model in which experts make strategic decisions about what practices to adopt and local site personal make tactical decisions about implementation. They believe that balancing participation and expertise provides the best formula for producing lasting QI for health care organizations across a wide variety of circumstances.     

Quality improvement--boon or boondoggle?

Is quality improvement (QI) reducing healthcare costs while improving patient care? Researchers find that QI has improved employee satisfaction and morale, but it was designed to do more. One solution is to use problem-solving techniques to help teams identify the level at which they want to address a problem, whether that be the subinstitutional, institutional, or system level. If QI is to fulfill its promise, skilled managers must create effective teams capable of defining and solving complex problems.     

Quality Improvement Strategies and Best Practices in Critical Access Hospitals

ABSTRACT: Context: Critical access hospitals (CAHs) face many challenges in implementing quality improvement (QI) initiatives, which include limited resources, low volume of patients, small staffs, and inadequate information technology. A primary goal of the Medicare Rural Hospital Flexibility Program is to improve the quality of care provided by CAHs. Purpose: This article describes key quality improvement initiatives for a national sample of CAHs that are actively involved in implementing quality-related initiatives in collaboration with support hospitals and statewide organizations. Methods: Researchers conducted a national telephone survey of 72 CAHs and 2 in-depth case studies of CAHs. Findings: The survey and case studies demonstrate that many CAHs are successfully implementing QI activities, including patient safety initiatives, improvements in overall QI processes and peer review processes, and implementation of QI projects focused on treatment of 1 or more specific diseases. The CAHs are involved with multiple external organizations in these activities. The administrators of the 2 case study CAHs have made QI a priority for their hospitals; ensured that resources are available for QI activities; and worked with their support hospitals, statewide organizations, and other CAHs to develop and implement rural-relevant QI initiatives. Conclusions: Cost-based Medicare reimbursement has been a key factor in the ability of CAHs to fund additional staff, staff training, and equipment to improve patient care. The commitment of hospital leaders and key staff is a crucial factor in moving QI initiatives forward in CAHs.     

News Letter

The authors examined how the association between quality improvement (QI) implementation in hospitals and hospital clinical quality is moderated by hospital organizational and environmental context. The authors used Ordinary Least Squares regression analysis of 1,784 community hospitals to model seven quality indicators as a function of four measures of QI implementation and a variety of control variables. They found that forces that are external and internal to the hospital condition the impact of particular QI activities on quality indicators: specifically data use, statistical tool use, and organizational emphasis on Continuous Quality Improvement (CQI). Results supported the proposition that QI implementation is unlikely to improve quality of care in hospital settings without a commensurate fit with the financial, strategic, and market imperatives faced by the hospital.     

Does quality improvement implementation affect hospital quality of care?

The authors examined how the association between quality improvement (QI) implementation in hospitals and hospital clinical quality is moderated by hospital organizational and environmental context. The authors used Ordinary Least Squares regression analysis of 1,784 community hospitals to model seven quality indicators as a function of four measures of QI implementation and a variety of control variables. They found that forces that are external and internal to the hospital condition the impact of particular QI activities on quality indicators: specifically data use, statistical tool use, and organizational emphasis on Continuous Quality Improvement (CQI). Results supported the proposition that QI implementation is unlikely to improve quality of care in hospital settings without a commensurate fit with the financial, strategic, and market imperatives faced by the hospital.     

The role of organizational infrastructure in implementation of hospitals' quality improvement

Quality improvement (QI) is an organized approach to planning and implementing continuous improvement in performance. Although QI holds promise for improving quality of care and patient safety, hospitals that adopt QI often struggle with its implementation. This article examines the role of organizational infrastructure in implementation of quality improvement practices and structures in hospitals. The authors focus specifically on four elements of hospital support and infrastructure for QI-integrated data systems, financial support for QI, clinical integration, and information system capability. These macrolevel factors provide consistent, ongoing support for the QI efforts of clinical teams engaging in direct patient care, thus promoting institutionalization of QI. Results from the multivariate analysis of 1997 survey data on 2350 hospitals provide strong support for the hypotheses. Results signal that organizations intent upon improving quality must attend to the context in which QI efforts are practiced, and that such efforts are unlikely to be effective unless appropriate support systems are in place to ensure full implementation.     

Why is Quality Improvement so Challenging? A Viable Systems Model Perspective to Understand the Frustrations of Healthcare Quality Improvement Managers

The challenges facing Quality Improvement Managers (QIMs) are often understood and addressed in isolation from wider healthcare organisation within which quality improvement initiatives are embedded. We draw on Stafford Beer's Viable System Model (VSM) to shed light on how the viability of quality improvement depends on the effective functioning of five critical quality improvement systems and the extent to which these systems are integrated within the healthcare organisation. These systems are System 1 (Operations), System 2 (Coordination), System 3 (Operational Control), System 4 (Development) and System 5 (Policy).Our analysis draws on interviews with 56 QIMs working in 15 of New Zealand's 20 District Health Boards. We use VSM to identify the sources of problems in QI implementation. These include changes in direction for QI initiatives; myopic behaviour resulting from fragmented systems of care; difficulties in managing and monitoring QI activities given variable staff engagement and inadequate resourcing; pressure for quick results rather developing QI capabilities; and a lack of strategic embeddedness.A viable QI system requires QI approaches that are (1) implemented at an organisation-wide level; (2) well-resourced and carefully monitored; (3) underpinned by a long-term vision; and (4) supported by QIMs with the necessary power and influence to integrate QI subsystem within the wider healthcare organisation.     

Quality improvement by providers: market developments hinder progress

Providers report maintaining, but not greatly enhancing, their quality improvement (QI) programs between 1999 and 2001. In addition, recent market developments are intensifying barriers to providers' QI efforts. A notable exception is the tremendous attention to medical errors, which is stimulating patient-safety activities in hospitals. It is too early to tell if the momentum from these activities can be sustained and provide a spark for revolutionary changes in QI more broadly.     

Maternity Care and Liability: Most Promising Policy Strategies for Improvement

BackgroundThe present liability system is not serving well childbearing women and newborns, maternity care clinicians, or maternity care payers. Examination of evidence about the impact of this system on maternity care led us to identify seven aims for a high-functioning liability system in this clinical context. Herein, we identify policy strategies that are most likely to meet these aims and contribute to needed improvements. A companion paper considers strategies that hold little promise.MethodsWe considered whether 25 strategies that have been used or proposed for improvement have met or could meet the seven aims. We used a best available evidence approach and drew on more recent empirical legal studies and health services research about maternity care and liability when available, and considered other studies when unavailable.FindingsTen strategies seem to have potential to improve liability matters in maternity care across multiple aims. The most promising strategy—implementing rigorous maternity care quality improvement (QI) programs—has led to better quality and outcomes of care, and impressive declines in liability claims, payouts, and premium levels.ConclusionsA number of promising strategies warrant demonstration and evaluation at the level of states, health systems, or other appropriate entities. Rigorous QI programs have a growing track record of contributing to diverse aims of a high-functioning liability system and seem to be a win–win–win prevention strategy for childbearing families, maternity care providers, and payers. Effective strategies are also needed to assist families when women and newborns are injured.     

Quality improvement: the pursuit of excellence

Sherbrooke Community Centre, a registered Eden Alternative home, has implemented structures and processes to support ongoing quality improvement (QI). A comprehensive QI program supports Sherbrooke's commitment to excellence. The organization's QI program is based on the Board of Directors' strategic plan and the core directions of the strategic plan are reflected in the QI standards. Sherbrooke's organizational principles (continuous improvement, communication/feedback, accountability, respect, empowerment/participation) are woven through the program. The result is an effective system that enhances quality of care and quality of life for residents.