Abstract

BackgroundWith a pending need to identify potential means to improved quality of care, national quality registries (NQRs) are identified as a promising route. Yet, there is limited evidence with regards to what hinders and facilitates the NQR innovation, what signifies the contexts in which NQRs are applied and drive quality improvement. Supposedly, barriers and facilitators to NQR-driven quality improvement may be found in the healthcare context, in the politico-administrative context, as well as with an NQR itself. In this study, we investigated the potential variation with regards to if and how an NQR was applied by decision-makers and users in regions and clinical settings. The aim was to depict the interplay between the clinical and the politico-administrative tiers in the use of NQRs to develop quality of care, examining an established registry on stroke care as a case study.MethodsWe interviewed 44 individuals representing the clinical and the politico-administrative settings of 4 out of 21 regions strategically chosen for including stroke units representing a variety of outcomes in the NQR on stroke (Riksstroke) and a variety of settings. The transcribed interviews were analysed by applying The Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR).ResultsIn two regions, decision-makers and/or administrators had initiated healthcare process projects for stroke, engaging the health professionals in the local stroke units who contributed with, for example, local data from Riksstroke. The Riksstroke data was used for identifying improvement issues, for setting goals, and asserting that the stroke units achieved an equivalent standard of care and a certain level of quality of stroke care. Meanwhile, one region had more recently initiated such a project and the fourth region had no similar collaboration across tiers. Apart from these projects, there was limited joint communication across tiers and none that included all individuals and functions engaged in quality improvement with regards to stroke care.ConclusionsIf NQRs are to provide for quality improvement and learning opportunities, advances must be made in the links between the structures and processes across all organisational tiers, including decision-makers, administrators and health professionals engaged in a particular healthcare process.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12913-015-1188-2) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Highlights

  • With a pending need to identify potential means to improved quality of care, national quality registries (NQRs) are identified as a promising route

  • Applying the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR), we present the structured analysis of the ‘Intervention Characteristics’, which was found to depict one common representation across the four regions

  • The CFIR domain Characteristics of Individuals was not used as the study did not focus on individual-level behaviour, and Outer Setting was found not to illustrate any differences or aspects that could illustrate the interplay and its influence on quality improvement by adopting NQRs, or Riksstroke in particular

Read more

Summary

Introduction

With a pending need to identify potential means to improved quality of care, national quality registries (NQRs) are identified as a promising route. There is limited evidence with regards to what hinders and facilitates the NQR innovation, what signifies the contexts in which NQRs are applied and drive quality improvement. Barriers and facilitators to NQR-driven quality improvement may be found in the healthcare context, in the politico-administrative context, as well as with an NQR itself. Registries can provide healthcare performance information, motivate change, spur quality improvement activities, and enable health professionals’ engagement in continuous learning through identifying and sharing best clinical practices [2, 3]. The effectiveness of feedback is positively influenced by components such as tailored quality improvement initiatives performed by local teams [5]. The success of quality improvement demands that this data feedback from medical registries is accompanied by local improvement efforts

Objectives
Methods
Results
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call