Measuring performance to drive improvement: development of a clinical indicator set for general medicine.

Clinical Epidemiology and Health Service Evaluation Unit, Royal Melbourne Hospital, Parkville, VIC, Australia.
Internal Medicine Journal (Impact Factor: 1.82). 03/2009; 39(6):361-9. DOI: 10.1111/j.1445-5994.2009.01913.x
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT There are delays in implementing evidence about effective therapy into clinical practice. Clinical indicators may support implementation of guideline recommendations.
To develop and evaluate the short-term impact of a clinical indicator set for general medicine.
A set of clinical process indicators was developed using a structured process. The indicator set was implemented between January 2006 and December 2006, using strategies based on evidence about effectiveness and local contextual factors. Evaluation included a structured survey of general medical staff to assess awareness and attitudes towards the programme and qualitative assessment of barriers to implementation. Impact on documentation of adherence to clinical indicators was assessed by auditing a random sample of medical records before (2003-2005) and after (2006) implementation.
Clinical indicators were developed for the following areas: venous thromboembolism, cognition, chronic heart failure, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, diabetes, low trauma fracture, patient written care plans. The programme was well supported and incurred little burden to staff. Implementation occurred largely as planned; however, documentation of adherence to clinical indicators was variable. There was a generally positive trend over time, but for most indicators this was independent of the implementation process and may have been influenced by other system improvement activities. Failure to demonstrate a significant impact during the pilot phase is likely to have been influenced by administrative factors, especially lack of an integrative data documentation and collection process.
Successful implementation in phase two is likely to depend upon an effective data collection system integrated into usual care.

  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Introduction:Cardiovascular diseases are among the most prevalent chronic diseases leading to high degrees of mortality and morbidity worldwide and in Iran. The aim of the current study was to determine and develop appropriate indicators for evaluating provided service quality for cardiovascular patients admitted to Cardiac Care Units (CCU) in Iran. Methods:In order to determine the indicators for evaluating provided service quality, a four-stage process including reviewing systematic review articles in premier bibliographic databases, interview, performing two rounds of Delphi technique, and holding experts panel by attendance of experts in different fields was adopted. Finally, after recognizing relevant indicators in resources, these indicators were finalized during various stages using ideas of 27 experts in different fields. Results:Among 2800 found articles in the text reviewing phase, 21 articles, which had completely mentioned relevant indicators, were studied and 48 related indicators were extracted. After two interviews with a cardiologist and an epidemiologist, 32 items of the indicators were omitted and replaced by 27 indicators coping with the conditions of Iranian hospitals. Finally, 43 indicators were added into the Delphi phase and after 2 rounds of Delphi with 18 specialists, 7 cases were excluded due to their low scores of applicability. In the experts' panel stage, 6 items were also omitted and 10 new indicators were developed to replace them. Eventually, 40 indicators were finalized. Conclusion:In this study, some proper indicators for evaluating provided service quality for CCU admissions in Iran were determined. Considering the informative richness of these indicators, they can be used by managers, policy makers, health service providers, and also insurance agencies in order to improve the quality of services, decisions, and policies.
    Journal of cardiovascular and thoracic research. 01/2013; 5(1):23-8.
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: California state and local tuberculosis (TB) programs used a systematic process to develop a set of indicators to measure and improve program performance in controlling TB. These indicators were the basis for a quality improvement process known as the TB Indicators Project. Indicators were derived from guidelines and legal mandates for clinical, case management, and surveillance standards and were assessed using established criteria. The indicators were calculated using existing surveillance data. The indicator set was field tested by local programs with high TB morbidity and subsequently revised. Collaboration with key stakeholders at all stages was crucial to developing useful and accepted indicators. Data accessibility was a critical requirement for indicator implementation. Indicators most frequently targeted for performance improvement were those perceived to be amenable to intervention. Indicators based on surveillance data can complement other public health program improvement efforts by identifying program gaps and successes and monitoring performance trends.
    Journal of public health management and practice: JPHMP 12/2012; · 1.47 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Drug-related problems (DRPs) are common in older people, resulting in a disproportionate number of serious medication adverse events. Pharmacist-led interventions have been shown to be effective in identifying and reducing DRPs such as medication interactions, omission of recommended medications and use of ineffective medications. In 2008 we proposed a prescribing indicators tool to assist in identifying DRPs as part of the Australian medication review process. The objective was to apply the proposed prescribing indicators tool to a cohort of older Australians, to assess its use in detecting potential DRPs. The prescribing indicators tool was applied in a cross-sectional observational study to 126 older (aged ≥65 years) English-speaking Australians taking five or more medications, as they were being discharged from a small private hospital into the community. Indicators were unmet when prescribing did not adhere to indicator tool guidelines. We found a high incidence of under-treatment, and use of inappropriate medications. There were on average 18 applicable indicators per patient, with each patient having on average seven unmet indicators. The use of a prescribing indicators tool for commonly used medications and common medical conditions in older Australians may contribute to the efficient identification of DRPs.
    The International journal of pharmacy practice. 06/2012; 20(3):172-82.