To examine whether performance measures improve more in accredited hospitals than in non-accredited hospital.
A historical follow-up study was performed using process of care data from all public Danish hospitals in order to examine the development over time in performance measures according to participation in accreditation programs.
All patients admitted for acute stroke, heart failure or ulcer at Danish hospitals.
Hospital accreditation by either The Joint Commission International or The Health Quality Service.
The primary outcome was a change in opportunity-based composite score and the secondary outcome was a change in all-or-none scores, both measures were based on the individual processes of care. These processes included seven processes related to stroke, six processes to heart failure, four to bleeding ulcer and four to perforated ulcer.
A total of 27 273 patients were included. The overall opportunity-based composite score improved for both non-accredited and accredited hospitals (13.7% [95% CI 10.6; 16.8] and 9.9% [95% 5.4; 14.4], respectively), but the improvements were significantly higher for non-accredited hospitals (absolute difference: 3.8% [95% 0.8; 8.3]). No significant differences were found at disease level. The overall all-or-none score increased significantly for non-accredited hospitals, but not for accredited hospitals. The absolute difference between improvements in the all-or-none score at non-accredited and accredited hospitals was not significant (3.2% [95% -3.6:9.9]).
Participating in accreditation was not associated with larger improvement in performance measures for acute stroke, heart failure or ulcer.
This study developed population-based and hospital-based indicators to examine the performance of Manitoba's 68 rural hospitals. Analyses of the indicators revealed considerable differences in the populations served and their use of rural hospital services. Hospital type was also an important factor for performance. The rural hospital indicators would be useful to hospital planners and regional policy makers for comparison purposes and for highlighting issues that need to be addressed.
To analyse the association between quality of care and technical (productive) efficiency in institutional long-term care wards for the elderly.
One hundred and fourteen public health centre hospitals and residential homes in Finland.
Wards were divided into two categories according to their rank in the quality distribution, considering 41 quality variables separately. The technical efficiency scores of the good- and poor-quality groups were compared using cross-sectional data.
Data envelopment analysis was used for calculating technical efficiency. The Mann-Whitney test and correlation coefficients were used to explore the association between quality and efficiency.
The wards where quality indicators indicated less pro-active (passive) nursing practice and more dependent patients-for instance, in terms of very high prevalence of bedfast residents or very high prevalence of daily physical restraints-performed more efficiently than the comparison group.
The results suggest that an association may exist between technical efficiency and unwanted dimensions of quality. Hence, the efficiency and quality of care are essential aspects of management and performance measurement in elderly care.
In 2012 the Canadian Association of Gastroenterology published 19 indicators of safety compromise. We studied the incidence of these indicators by reviewing all colonoscopies performed in St. John's, NL, between January 1, 2012, and June 30, 2012. Results. A total of 3235 colonoscopies were included. Adverse events are as follows. Medication-related includes use of reversal agents 0.1%, hypoxia 9.9%, hypotension 15.4%, and hypertension 0.9%. No patients required CPR or experienced allergic reactions or laryngospasm/bronchospasm. The indicator, "sedation dosages in patients older than 70," showed lower usage of fentanyl and midazolam in elderly patients. Procedure-related immediate includes perforation 0.2%, immediate postpolypectomy bleeding 0.3%, need for hospital admission or transfer to the emergency department 0.1%, and severe persistent abdominal pain proven not to be perforation 0.4%. Instrument impaction was not seen. Procedure-related delayed includes death within 14 days 0.1%, unplanned health care visit within 14 days of the colonoscopy 1.8%, unplanned hospitalization within 14 days of the colonoscopy 0.6%, bleeding within 14 days of colonoscopy 0.2%, infection 0.03%, and metabolic complication 0.03%. Conclusions. The most common adverse events were mild and sedation related. Rates of serious adverse events were in keeping with published reports.
This paper provides a reflection on the findings of Canada's first-ever chartbook on the quality of healthcare in Canada. Quality of Healthcare in Canada: A Chartbook was published in 2010 by the Canadian Health Services Research Foundation in partnership with the Canadian Institute for Health Information and the Canadian Patient Safety Institute, and with support from Statistics Canada. This paper, by the chartbook authors (Sutherland and Leatherman) and colleagues (Law, Verma and Petersen), presents selected key findings and lessons from the chartbook and aims to serve as a catalyst for ideas and discussion in the papers that follow. The chartbook identified a lack of common language and indicators on quality across Canada's provinces and territories, underscoring the need to create and coordinate core measures. The Canadian chartbook and this issue of Healthcare Papers provide an update on the existing quality measures and the state of healthcare quality in Canada, and create the opportunity for jurisdictions to learn from one another and to contemplate the steps required to improve quality across the country.
Home care is becoming an increasingly vital sector in the health care system yet very little is known about the characteristics of home care clients and the quality of care provided in Canada. We describe these clients and evaluate home care quality indicator rates in two regions.
A cross-sectional analysis of assessments completed for older (age 65+) home care clients in both Ontario (n = 102,504) and the Winnipeg Regional Health Authority (n = 9,250) of Manitoba, using the Resident Assessment Instrument for Home Care (RAI-HC). This assessment has been mandated for use in these two regions and the indicators are generated directly from items within the assessment. The indicators are expressed as rates of negative outcomes (e.g., falls, dehydration). Client-level risk adjustment of the indicator rates was used to enable fair comparisons between the regions.
Clients had a mean age of 83.2 years, the majority were female (68.6%) and the regions were very similar on these demographic characteristics. Nearly all clients (92.4%) required full assistance with instrumental activities of daily living (IADLs), approximately 35% had activities of daily living (ADL) impairments, and nearly 50% had some degree of cognitive impairment, which was higher among clients in Ontario (48.8% vs. 37.0%). The highest quality indicator rates were related to clients who had ADL/rehabilitation potential but were not receiving therapy (range: 66.8%-91.6%) and the rate of cognitive decline (65.4%-76.3%). Ontario clients had higher unadjusted rates across 18 of the 22 indicators and the unadjusted differences between the two provinces ranged from 0.6% to 28.4%. For 13 of the 19 indicators that have risk adjustment, after applying the risk adjustment methodology, the difference between the adjusted rates in the two regions was reduced.
Home care clients in these two regions are experiencing a significant level of functional and cognitive impairment, health instability and daily pain. The quality indicators provide some important insight into variations between the two regions and can serve as an important decision-support tool for flagging potential quality issues and isolating areas for improvement.
Notes
Cites: Home Health Care Serv Q. 2008;27(1):59-7418510199
Cites: BMJ Qual Saf. 2013 Dec;22(12):989-9723828878
Department of Social and Preventative Medicine, Centre de Recherche du CHU (Hôpital de l'Enfant- Jésus), Université Laval, Québec City, Québec, Canada. lynne.moore.cha@ssss.gouv.qc.ca
Process performance indicators that evaluate trauma centers in clinical case management provide information essential to the improvement of trauma care. However, multiple indicators are needed to adequately evaluate process performance, which renders comparisons cumbersome. Several methods are available for generating composite indicators that measure global performance. The goal of this study was to compare three composite methods that are widely used in other health care domains to identify the most appropriate for trauma care process performance evaluation.
In this retrospective, multicenter cohort study, 15 process performance indicators were implemented using data from a Canadian provincial trauma registry (19,853 patients; 59 centers) on patients with an Injury Severity Score (ISS) greater than 15. Composite scores were derived using three methods as follows: the indicator average, the opportunity model, and a latent variable model. Composite scores were evaluated in terms of discrimination, construct validity (association with an indicator of trauma center structural performance), criterion predictive validity (association with clinical outcomes), and forecasting (correlation over time).
All composite scores discriminated well between trauma centers. Only the average indicator score was correlated with improved structure (r = 0.29; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.07-0.53), lower risk-adjusted mortality (r = -0.22; 95% CI, -0.46 to 0.04), and lower risk-adjusted complication rate (r = -0.48; 95% CI, -0.65 to -0.25). Composite scores calculated with 1999 to 2002 data all correlated with those calculated with 2003 to 2006 data (r = 0.49, 0.87, and 0.84 for the indicator average, the opportunity model, and the latent variable model, respectively).
Results suggest that of the three composite scores evaluated, only the indicator average demonstrates content and predictive criterion validity, discriminates between centers, and has good forecasting properties. In addition, this score is simple and intuitive and not subject to variation in weights over trauma systems and time. The observed association between higher indicator average scores and lower risk-adjusted mortality and complication rates suggests that improving process performance may improve patient outcome.
Few studies have asked how adolescents perceive the quality of psychiatric care. Therefore, the aim of the study was to explore adolescents' perception of quality of care and of satisfying treatment outcomes.
Fourteen adolescents participated in this hermeneutic study.
Several concepts describing adolescents' perspective of quality of care were found: secure place, tough love, peer solidarity, self-expression, and person not patient. Concepts describing satisfying treatment outcomes fell into four categories: improved mental health, personal development, strengthening of the self, and improved family relations.
By casting light on users' perspectives, the study offers guidance for improvement of quality of care and for the development of patient satisfaction instruments.
To assess quality of health care provided in a representative Canadian mental health service using conformance to evidence-based treatment recommendations, and to examine differences from published US results.
We used a cross-sectional cohort design involving a randomly selected sample of patients diagnosed with schizophrenia attending 1 of 3 mental health clinics in 1 Canadian regional health system. The sample size was calculated to detect differences with the US sample. Conformance criteria were based on a published protocol. Data were collected using patient interviews and a structured review of health records. Conformance to 9 key Schizophrenia Patient Outcomes Research Team recommendations was assessed.
Conformance ranged between 58% and 90% for pharmacological recommendations, and 0% to 81% for psychosocial recommendations. No patients who met criteria for assertive case management had been referred to an assertive case management team. Significant differences in conformance rates to some treatment recommendations were found between Canadian and published US results.
It proved possible to assess health care quality using process measures of conformance to treatment recommendations. Conformance to clinical recommendations for pharmacotherapy is higher than for psychosocial therapies. The absence of barriers to access for pharmacological therapies likely enhances the higher conformance to these recommendations. Limited or variable access to psychosocial services, specifically assertive community treatment, likely negatively affects conformance to psychosocial treatment recommendations. Methodological limitations preclude drawing conclusions on comparisons between Canadian and US services.
Notes
Comment In: Can J Psychiatry. 2012 Sep;57(9):583; author reply 583-423073036
In cardiac surgery, perioperative death in low-risk patients is uncommon, but does occur. Reports on the incidence, cause and circumstances of death in this population are rare. We analyzed the early mortality and cause of death in patients with an additive EuroSCORE=3 who underwent cardiac surgery between 2001 and August 2009 in Stockholm. We also investigated if death could be considered preventable, and in that case, if it was due to a technical or a system error. Among 3924 low-risk patients, 15 died within 30 days of surgery, and early mortality was 0.38%. Cause of death was mostly cardiac related (11 of 15). Death occurred after hospital discharge in three patients, and was classified as non-preventable in 13 patients. In the remaining two patients, the circumstances leading to death were categorized as due to a system error. A systematic and structured analysis of the circumstances resulting in death in low-risk patients, in addition to traditional morbidity and mortality conferences, have the potential to identify problems and offer improvements in the quality of care.
