Home LiteratureArticle Details
PMID: 22024188 Published · epublish English Journal Article Randomized Controlled Trial

Evaluating the effectiveness of a tailored multifaceted performance feedback intervention to improve the quality of care: protocol for a cluster randomized trial in intensive care.

Implementation science : IS ·Vol. 6 ·2011-10-24 ·Pages 119

van der Veer SN, de Vos ML, Jager KJ, van der Voort PH, Peek N, Westert GP, Graafmans WC, de Keizer NF

Abstract

Feedback is potentially effective in improving the quality of care. However, merely sending reports is no guarantee that performance data are used as input for systematic quality improvement (QI). Therefore, we developed a multifaceted intervention tailored to prospectively analyzed barriers to using indicators: the Information Feedback on Quality Indicators (InFoQI) program. This program aims to promote the use of performance indicator data as input for local systematic QI. We will conduct a study to assess the impact of the InFoQI program on patient outcome and organizational process measures of care, and to gain insight into barriers and success factors that affected the program's impact. The study will be executed in the context of intensive care. This paper presents the study's protocol. We will conduct a cluster randomized controlled trial with intensive care units (ICUs) in the Netherlands. We will include ICUs that submit indicator data to the Dutch National Intensive Care Evaluation (NICE) quality registry and that agree to allocate at least one intensivist and one ICU nurse for implementation of the intervention. Eligible ICUs (clusters) will be randomized to receive basic NICE registry feedback (control arm) or to participate in the InFoQI program (intervention arm). The InFoQI program consists of comprehensive feedback, establishing a local, multidisciplinary QI team, and educational outreach visits. The primary outcome measures will be length of ICU stay and the proportion of shifts with a bed occupancy rate above 80%. We will also conduct a process evaluation involving ICUs in the intervention arm to investigate their actual exposure to and experiences with the InFoQI program. The results of this study will inform those involved in providing ICU care on the feasibility of a tailored multifaceted performance feedback intervention and its ability to accelerate systematic and local quality improvement. Although our study will be conducted within the domain of intensive care, we believe our conclusions will be generalizable to other settings that have a quality registry including an indicator set available. Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN50542146.

MeSH Terms
Clinical Protocols Cluster Analysis Critical Care/methods Feedback, Psychological Humans Intensive Care Units/statistics & numerical data Length of Stay Netherlands Program Evaluation Quality of Health Care/statistics & numerical data Registries Surveys and Questionnaires
Authors & Affiliations
8 authors, click to expand affiliations / ORCID
van der Veer Sabine N
Department of Medical Informatics, Academic Medical Center, PO Box 22660, 1100 DD Amsterdam, the Netherlands. [email protected]
de Vos Maartje L G
Jager Kitty J
van der Voort Peter H J
Peek Niels
Westert Gert P
Graafmans Wilco C
de Keizer Nicolette F
References (49)
49 references, click to expand
  1. Developing quality measures for sepsis care in the ICU.
    Jt Comm J Qual Patient Saf. 2007 Sep;33(9):559-68 PMID: 17915530
  2. Statistical process control as a tool for research and healthcare improvement.
    Qual Saf Health Care. 2003 Dec;12(6):458-64 PMID: 14645763
  3. Quality of data collected for severity of illness scores in the Dutch National Intensive Care Evaluation (NICE) registry.
    Intensive Care Med. 2002 May;28(5):656-9 PMID: 12029418
  4. Implementing quality indicators in intensive care units: exploring barriers to and facilitators of behaviour change.
    Implement Sci. 2010 Jul 01;5:52 PMID: 20594312
  5. The tension between needing to improve care and knowing how to do it.
    N Engl J Med. 2007 Aug 9;357(6):608-13 PMID: 17687138
  6. Developing and pilot testing quality indicators in the intensive care unit.
    J Crit Care. 2003 Sep;18(3):145-55 PMID: 14595567
  7. Marginal models for clustered time-to-event data with competing risks using pseudovalues.
    Biometrics. 2011 Mar;67(1):1-7 PMID: 20377579
  8. CONSORT 2010 explanation and elaboration: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials.
    BMJ. 2010 Mar 23;340:c869 PMID: 20332511
  9. Tailoring quality improvement interventions to identified barriers: a multiple case analysis.
    J Eval Clin Pract. 2007 Apr;13(2):161-8 PMID: 17378860
  10. Improving the quality of quality improvement projects.
    Jt Comm J Qual Patient Saf. 2010 Oct;36(10):468-73 PMID: 21548508
  11. Tutorial in biostatistics: competing risks and multi-state models.
    Stat Med. 2007 May 20;26(11):2389-430 PMID: 17031868
  12. Length of stay in the intensive care unit. Effects of practice guidelines and feedback.
    JAMA. 1990 Aug 22-29;264(8):992-7 PMID: 2376892
  13. Key performance indicators in intensive care medicine. A retrospective matched cohort study.
    J Int Med Res. 2009 Sep-Oct;37(5):1267-84 PMID: 19930832
  14. The impact of different prognostic models and their customization on institutional comparison of intensive care units.
    Crit Care Med. 2007 Nov;35(11):2553-60 PMID: 17893625
  15. A multifaceted intervention for quality improvement in a network of intensive care units: a cluster randomized trial.
    JAMA. 2011 Jan 26;305(4):363-72 PMID: 21248161
  16. Longitudinal data analysis for discrete and continuous outcomes.
    Biometrics. 1986 Mar;42(1):121-30 PMID: 3719049
  17. Evaluating the quality of medical care. 1966.
    Milbank Q. 2005;83(4):691-729 PMID: 16279964
  18. Variation in critical care services across North America and Western Europe.
    Crit Care Med. 2008 Oct;36(10):2787-93, e1-9 PMID: 18766102
  19. Using quality indicators to improve hospital care: a review of the literature.
    Int J Qual Health Care. 2009 Apr;21(2):119-29 PMID: 19155288
  20. Collaborative quality improvement to promote evidence based surfactant for preterm infants: a cluster randomised trial.
    BMJ. 2004 Oct 30;329(7473):1004 PMID: 15514344
  21. Design, analysis and presentation of factorial randomised controlled trials.
    BMC Med Res Methodol. 2003 Nov 24;3:26 PMID: 14633287
  22. Development and implementation of a high-quality clinical database: the Australian and New Zealand Intensive Care Society Adult Patient Database.
    J Crit Care. 2006 Jun;21(2):133-41 PMID: 16769456
  23. Design and analysis of controlled trials in naturally clustered environments: implications for medical informatics.
    J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2002 May-Jun;9(3):230-8 PMID: 11971884
  24. Developing and testing changes in delivery of care.
    Ann Intern Med. 1998 Apr 15;128(8):651-6 PMID: 9537939
  25. What do we know about how to do audit and feedback? Pitfalls in applying evidence from a systematic review.
    BMC Health Serv Res. 2005 Jul 13;5:50 PMID: 16011811
  26. Improving quality of care. A systematic review on how medical registries provide information feedback to health care providers.
    Int J Med Inform. 2010 May;79(5):305-23 PMID: 20189451
  27. Case mix, outcome and length of stay for admissions to adult, general critical care units in England, Wales and Northern Ireland: the Intensive Care National Audit & Research Centre Case Mix Programme Database.
    Crit Care. 2004 Apr;8(2):R99-111 PMID: 15025784
  28. Research designs for studies evaluating the effectiveness of change and improvement strategies.
    Qual Saf Health Care. 2003 Feb;12(1):47-52 PMID: 12571345
  29. A pragmatic-explanatory continuum indicator summary (PRECIS): a tool to help trial designers.
    J Clin Epidemiol. 2009 May;62(5):464-75 PMID: 19348971
  30. Defining and improving data quality in medical registries: a literature review, case study, and generic framework.
    J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2002 Nov-Dec;9(6):600-11 PMID: 12386111
  31. Designing a quality improvement intervention: a systematic approach.
    Qual Saf Health Care. 2003 Jun;12(3):215-20 PMID: 12792013
  32. Closing the gap between research and practice: an overview of systematic reviews of interventions to promote the implementation of research findings. The Cochrane Effective Practice and Organization of Care Review Group.
    BMJ. 1998 Aug 15;317(7156):465-8 PMID: 9703533
  33. Use and misuse of process and outcome data in managing performance of acute medical care: avoiding institutional stigma.
    Lancet. 2004 Apr 3;363(9415):1147-54 PMID: 15064036
  34. Improving data quality control in quality improvement projects.
    Int J Qual Health Care. 2009 Apr;21(2):145-50 PMID: 19218334
  35. Outreach education to improve quality of rural ICU care. Results of a randomized trial.
    Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 1998 Aug;158(2):418-23 PMID: 9700115
  36. Training in data definitions improves quality of intensive care data.
    Crit Care. 2003 Apr;7(2):179-84 PMID: 12720565
  37. Project IMPACT: results from a pilot validity study of a new observational database.
    Crit Care Med. 2002 Dec;30(12):2765-70 PMID: 12483071
  38. Methods in health service research. Evaluation of health interventions at area and organisation level.
    BMJ. 1999 Aug 7;319(7206):376-9 PMID: 10435968
  39. Basic statistics for clinicians: 1. Hypothesis testing.
    CMAJ. 1995 Jan 1;152(1):27-32 PMID: 7804919
  40. Audit and feedback: effects on professional practice and health care outcomes.
    Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2006 Apr 19;(2):CD000259 PMID: 16625533
  41. Process evaluation on quality improvement interventions.
    Qual Saf Health Care. 2003 Feb;12(1):40-6 PMID: 12571344
  42. [Indicators of quality in the critical patient].
    Med Intensiva. 2008 Jan-Feb;32(1):23-32 PMID: 18221710
  43. Results of a collaborative quality improvement program on outcomes and costs in a tertiary critical care unit.
    Crit Care Med. 1999 Sep;27(9):1768-74 PMID: 10507596
  44. Evidence-based quality improvement: the state of the science.
    Health Aff (Millwood). 2005 Jan-Feb;24(1):138-50 PMID: 15647225
  45. Quality measurement at intensive care units: which indicators should we use?
    J Crit Care. 2007 Dec;22(4):267-74 PMID: 18086396
  46. Improving the reporting of pragmatic trials: an extension of the CONSORT statement.
    BMJ. 2008 Nov 11;337:a2390 PMID: 19001484
  47. Improving quality improvement using achievable benchmarks for physician feedback: a randomized controlled trial.
    JAMA. 2001 Jun 13;285(22):2871-9 PMID: 11401608
  48. CONSORT statement: extension to cluster randomised trials.
    BMJ. 2004 Mar 20;328(7441):702-8 PMID: 15031246
  49. Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE) IV: hospital mortality assessment for today's critically ill patients.
    Crit Care Med. 2006 May;34(5):1297-310 PMID: 16540951
Article Info
Journal
Implementation science : IS
Abbr.
Implement Sci
ISSN
1748-5908
DOI
10.1186/1748-5908-6-119
Email
[email protected]
Published
2011-10-24
Epub
2011-00-24
Pages
119
Language
English
Region
England
NLM ID
101258411
PMCID
PMC3217909
Subset
IM
Databases
ISRCTN
ISRCTN50542146
External Links
PubMed source DOI: 10.1186/1748-5908-6-119 PMC Full Text View journal details
Analysis Services
Analysis Services

Contact

No. 2 Wenbo Road, Zhangqiu District, Jinan, Shandong

Qilu Normal University · Genelibs Bioinformatics Lab

750 Shunhua Rd, Jinan

2F, Bldg F, University Science Park

Tel: 0531-88819269

WeChat Official Account

Follow our WeChat subscription account for real-time updates and the latest in medical and biological research.


Business Email

E-mail: [email protected]

Copyright © 2026.Genelibs Jinan Honghui Biotechnology Co., Ltd. 鲁ICP备20007159号-2