6
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Use of a maternal newborn audit and feedback system in Ontario: a collective case study

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          As part of a larger study examining the effectiveness of the Maternal Newborn Dashboard, an electronic audit and feedback system to improve maternal-newborn care practices and outcomes, the purpose of this study was to increase our understanding of factors explaining variability in performance after implementation of the Dashboard in Ontario, Canada.

          Methods

          A collective case study. A maximum variation sampling approach was used to invite hospitals reflecting different criteria to participate in a 1-day to 2-day site visit by the research team. The visits included: (1) semistructured interviews and focus groups with healthcare providers, leaders and personnel involved in clinical change processes; (2) observations and document review. Interviews and focus groups were audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim. Qualitative content analysis was used to code and categorise the data.

          Results

          Between June and November 2016, we visited 14 maternal-newborn hospitals. Hospitals were grouped into four quadrants based on their key indicator performance and level of engagement with the Dashboard. Findings revealed four overarching themes that contribute to the varying success of sites in achieving practice change on the Dashboard key performance indicators, namely, interdisciplinary collaboration and accountability, application of formal change strategies, team trust and use of evidence and data, as well as alignment with organisational priorities and support.

          Conclusion

          The diversity of facilitators and barriers across the 14 hospitals highlights the need to go beyond a ‘one size fits all’ approach when implementing audit and feedback systems. Future work to identify tools to assess barriers to practice change and to evaluate the effects of cointerventions to optimise audit and feedback systems for clinical practice change is needed.

          Related collections

          Most cited references14

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          The experiences of professionals with using information from patient-reported outcome measures to improve the quality of healthcare: a systematic review of qualitative research.

          To synthesise qualitative studies that investigated the experiences of healthcare professionals with using information from patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) to improve the quality of care. A qualitative systematic review was conducted by searching PubMed, PsycINFO and CINAHL with no time restrictions. Hand searching was also performed. Eligible studies were evaluated using the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme toolkit for qualitative studies. A thematic synthesis identified common themes across studies. Study characteristics were examined to explain differences in findings. All healthcare settings. Healthcare professionals. Professionals' views of PROMs after receiving PROMs feedback about individual patients or groups of patients. Sixteen studies met the inclusion criteria. Barriers and facilitators to the use of PROMs emerged within four main themes: collecting and incorporating the data (practical), valuing the data (attitudinal), making sense of the data (methodological) and using the data to make changes to patient care (impact). Professionals value PROMs when they are useful for the clinical decision-making process. Practical barriers to the routine use of PROMs are prominent when the correct infrastructure is not in place before commencing data collection and when their use is disruptive to normal work routines. Technology can play a greater role in processing the information in the most efficient manner. Improvements to the interpretability of PROMs should increase their use. Attitudes to the use of PROMs may be improved by engaging professionals in the planning stage of the intervention and by ensuring a high level of transparency around the rationale for data collection. Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://group.bmj.com/group/rights-licensing/permissions.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Introducing dyadic interviews as a method for collecting qualitative data.

            In dyadic interviews, two participants interact in response to open-ended research questions. There are few precedents for using dyadic interviews as a technique for qualitative research. We introduce this method largely in comparison to focus groups, because both represent forms of interactive interviewing. We do not, however, view dyadic interviews as miniature focus groups, and treat them as generating their own opportunities and issues. To illustrate the nature of dyadic interviewing, we present summaries of three studies using this method. In the first study, we used dyadic interviews and photovoice techniques to examine experiences of people with early-stage dementia. In the second study, we explored the experiences of staff who provided services to elderly housing residents. In the third study, we examined barriers and facilitators to substance abuse treatment among Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders in Hawaii. We conclude with a discussion of directions for future research using dyadic interviews.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: found
              Is Open Access

              Characteristics of healthcare organisations struggling to improve quality: results from a systematic review of qualitative studies

              Background Identifying characteristics associated with struggling healthcare organisations may help inform improvement. Thus, we systematically reviewed the literature to: (1) Identify organisational factors associated with struggling healthcare organisations and (2) Summarise these factors into actionable domains. Methods Systematic review of qualitative studies that evaluated organisational characteristics of healthcare organisations that were struggling as defined by below-average patient outcomes (eg, mortality) or quality of care metrics (eg, Patient Safety Indicators). Searches were conducted in MEDLINE (via Ovid), EMBASE, Cochrane Library, CINAHL, and Web of Science from database inception through February 8 2018. Qualitative data were analysed using framework-based synthesis and summarised into key domains. Study quality was evaluated using the Critical Appraisal Skills Program tool. Results Thirty studies (33 articles) from multiple countries and settings (eg, acute care, outpatient) with a diverse range of interviewees (eg, nurses, leadership, staff) were included in the final analysis. Five domains characterised struggling healthcare organisations: poor organisational culture (limited ownership, not collaborative, hierarchical, with disconnected leadership), inadequate infrastructure (limited quality improvement, staffing, information technology or resources), lack of a cohesive mission (mission conflicts with other missions, is externally motivated, poorly defined or promotes mediocrity), system shocks (ie, events such as leadership turnover, new electronic health record system or organisational scandals that detract from daily operations), and dysfunctional external relations with other hospitals, stakeholders, or governing bodies. Conclusions Struggling healthcare organisations share characteristics that may affect their ability to provide optimal care. Understanding and identifying these characteristics may provide a first step to helping low performers address organisational challenges to improvement. Systematic review registration PROSPERO: CRD42017067367.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                BMJ Qual Saf
                BMJ Qual Saf
                qhc
                bmjqs
                BMJ Quality & Safety
                BMJ Publishing Group (BMA House, Tavistock Square, London, WC1H 9JR )
                2044-5415
                2044-5423
                August 2019
                16 February 2019
                : 28
                : 8
                : 635-644
                Affiliations
                [1 ] departmentBetter Outcomes Registry & Network (BORN) , Children’s Hospital of Eastern Ontario — Ottawa Children’s Treatment Centre (CHEO-OCTC) , Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
                [2 ] Children's Hospital of Eastern Ontario Research Institute , Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
                [3 ] departmentSchool of Nursing , University of Ottawa , Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
                [4 ] departmentClinical Epidemiology Program , Ottawa Hospital Research Institute , Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
                [5 ] departmentSchool of Epidemiology and Public Health , University of Ottawa , Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
                [6 ] departmentDepartment of Medicine , University of Ottawa , Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
                [7 ] departmentMcMaster Midwifery Research Centre , McMaster University , Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
                [8 ] departmentDivision of Neonatology , Children's Hospital of Eastern Ontario and The Ottawa Hospital , Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
                [9 ] departmentDepartment of Pediatrics , University of Ottawa , Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
                [10 ] departmentDepartment of Obstetrics & Gynecology , Queen’s University and Kingston General Hospital , Kingston, Ontario, Canada
                [11 ] departmentObstetrics, Maternal and Newborn Investigations (OMNI) Research Group , Ottawa Hospital Research Institute , Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
                [12 ] departmentDepartment of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Newborn Care , The Ottawa Hospital , Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
                [13 ] departmentDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology , The University of Ottawa , Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
                Author notes
                [Correspondence to ] Jessica Reszel, BORN Ontario, Ottawa, ON K1H 8L1, Canada; jreszel@ 123456cheo.on.ca
                Author information
                http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1702-5629
                http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8015-8243
                Article
                bmjqs-2018-008354
                10.1136/bmjqs-2018-008354
                6663061
                30772816
                8c694c7a-ca3f-4039-b29f-ac69d38878d1
                © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2019. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.

                This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited, appropriate credit is given, any changes made indicated, and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0

                History
                : 18 May 2018
                : 11 January 2019
                : 20 January 2019
                Funding
                Funded by: FundRef http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100000024, Canadian Institutes of Health Research;
                Award ID: 133576
                Funded by: FundRef http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100000226, Ontario Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care;
                Award ID: 06684
                Categories
                Original Research
                1506
                Custom metadata
                unlocked

                Public health
                maternal-newborn care,audit and feedback,case study,qualitative,knowledge translation,obstetrics

                Comments

                Comment on this article