Skip header and navigation

3 records – page 1 of 1.

Evaluation of quality improvement programmes.

https://arctichealth.org/en/permalink/ahliterature187346
Source
Qual Saf Health Care. 2002 Sep;11(3):270-5
Publication Type
Article
Date
Sep-2002
Author
J. Øvretveit
D. Gustafson
Author Affiliation
Nordic School of Public Health, Karolinska Institute, Sweden. jovret@aol.com
Source
Qual Saf Health Care. 2002 Sep;11(3):270-5
Date
Sep-2002
Language
English
Publication Type
Article
Keywords
Evidence-Based Medicine
Health Services Research - methods
Hospital Administration - methods - standards
Humans
Management Audit
Program Evaluation - methods
Research Design - standards
Sweden
Total Quality Management
Abstract
In response to increasing concerns about quality, many countries are carrying out large scale programmes which include national quality strategies, hospital programmes, and quality accreditation, assessment and review processes. Increasing amounts of resources are being devoted to these interventions, but do they ensure or improve quality of care? There is little research evidence as to their effectiveness or the conditions for maximum effectiveness. Reasons for the lack of evaluation research include the methodological challenges of measuring outcomes and attributing causality to these complex, changing, long term social interventions to organisations or health systems, which themselves are complex and changing. However, methods are available which can be used to evaluate these programmes and which can provide decision makers with research based guidance on how to plan and implement them. This paper describes the research challenges, the methods which can be used, and gives examples and guidance for future research. It emphasises the important contribution which such research can make to improving the effectiveness of these programmes and to developing the science of quality improvement.
Notes
Cites: Milbank Q. 1998;76(4):625-48, 5119879305
Cites: Milbank Q. 1998;76(4):593-624, 5109879304
Cites: Int J Qual Health Care. 2000 Jun;12(3):203-910894191
Cites: Qual Health Care. 2001 Mar;10(1):40-811239143
Cites: BMJ. 2001 Apr 7;322(7290):851-411290644
Cites: Int J Health Care Qual Assur Inc Leadersh Health Serv. 2000;13(4-5):200-711486674
Cites: J Manag Med. 2001;15(2):125-4111547821
Cites: BMJ. 2001 Sep 29;323(7315):746-911576986
Cites: Int J Health Plann Manage. 2001 Jul-Sep;16(3):229-4111596559
Cites: Int J Qual Health Care. 2001 Oct;13(5):367-7411669564
Cites: Qual Lett Healthc Lead. 1994 Apr;6(3):14-710133644
Cites: Qual Manag Health Care. 1994 Summer;2(4):63-7210137609
Cites: Int J Qual Health Care. 1994 Jun;6(2):115-327953212
Cites: Jt Comm J Qual Improv. 1994 Aug;20(8):425-428000481
Cites: Health Serv Res. 1995 Jun;30(2):377-4017782222
Cites: Health Care Manage Rev. 1995 Spring;20(2):16-337607882
Cites: Health Care Manage Rev. 1995 Fall;20(4):15-25; discussion 28-9, 30-338543468
Cites: Hosp Health Serv Adm. 1996 Summer;41(2):143-5910157960
Cites: Health Care Manage Rev. 1996 Winter;21(1):48-608647690
Cites: Health Care Manage Rev. 1996 Winter;21(1):73-828647694
Cites: Qual Health Care. 1997 Mar;6(1):49-5510166603
Cites: Int J Qual Health Care. 2000 Jun;12(3):169-7510894187
PubMed ID
12486994 View in PubMed
Less detail

The Norwegian approach to integrated quality development.

https://arctichealth.org/en/permalink/ahliterature193337
Source
J Manag Med. 2001;15(2):125-41
Publication Type
Article
Date
2001
Author
J. Ovretveit
Author Affiliation
Bergen University School of Medicine, Norway.
Source
J Manag Med. 2001;15(2):125-41
Date
2001
Language
English
Publication Type
Article
Keywords
Critical Pathways
Data Collection
Efficiency, Organizational
Guidelines as Topic
Health Services Research
Hospitals, Public - organization & administration
Humans
Management Quality Circles
Models, organizational
Motivation
Norway
Patient satisfaction
Planning Techniques
Professional Competence
Program Development - methods
Total Quality Management - methods - organization & administration
Abstract
The UK NHS quality proposals require all NHS organisations to develop an "integrated approach " to quality. In other countries, health care organisations are also working to ensure that the many different quality methods and systems used in health organisations do not duplicate or conflict with each other. The question this paper addresses is "what would an integrated approach to quality look like and how might managers and clinicians develop such an approach in their organisation?" The findings from the Norwegian total quality management experiment in six hospitals were that TQM could not be applied in its pure form in public health care services to ensure integration. The paper draws on this research to describe these hospitals' approach to integrate the different projects and systems which were stimulated by their initial quality programmes. The paper describes the "integrated quality development" approach which characterised these programmes.
PubMed ID
11547821 View in PubMed
Less detail

Quality collaboratives: lessons from research.

https://arctichealth.org/en/permalink/ahliterature187479
Source
Qual Saf Health Care. 2002 Dec;11(4):345-51
Publication Type
Article
Date
Dec-2002
Author
J. ØVretveit
P. Bate
P. Cleary
S. Cretin
D. Gustafson
K. McInnes
H. McLeod
T. Molfenter
P. Plsek
G. Robert
S. Shortell
T. Wilson
Author Affiliation
The Nordic School of Public Health, Goteborg, Sweden The Health Services Management Centre, Birmingham University, UK. jovret@aol.com
Source
Qual Saf Health Care. 2002 Dec;11(4):345-51
Date
Dec-2002
Language
English
Publication Type
Article
Keywords
Cooperative Behavior
Diffusion of Innovation
Guidelines as Topic
Health Care Coalitions - organization & administration
Health Services Research
Humans
Management Quality Circles
Organizational Objectives
Quality Assurance, Health Care - methods - organization & administration
Sweden
Abstract
Quality improvement collaboratives are increasingly being used in many countries to achieve rapid improvements in health care. However, there is little independent evidence that they are more cost effective than other methods, and little knowledge about how they could be made more effective. A number of systematic evaluations are being performed by researchers in North America, the UK, and Sweden. This paper presents the shared ideas from two meetings of these researchers. The evidence to date is that some collaboratives have stimulated improvements in patient care and organisational performance, but there are significant differences between collaboratives and teams. The researchers agreed on the possible reasons why some were less successful than others, and identified 10 challenges which organisers and teams need to address to achieve improvement. In the absence of more conclusive evidence, these guidelines are likely to be useful for collaborative organisers, teams and their managers and may also contribute to further research into collaboratives and the spread of innovations in health care.
Notes
Comment In: Qual Saf Health Care. 2002 Dec;11(4):30712468688
PubMed ID
12468695 View in PubMed
Less detail