Review of 128 quality of care mechanisms: A framework and mapping for health system stewards

Multicriteria Risk Evaluation Model: Utilizing Fuzzy Logic for Improved Transparency and Quality of Risk Evaluation in Healthcare

Introduction

Risk management is essential for quality assurance in modern healthcare organizations. Risk matrices are widely used to evaluate risks in healthcare settings; however, this approach has noteworthy weaknesses and limitations. This paper introduces a novel risk evaluation model that utilizes multicriteria decision-making and fuzzy logic, to enhance the transparency and quality of the risk evaluation process in healthcare.

Methods

The Multicriteria Evaluation Model was developed using the Decision Expert method and expert knowledge integration. Fuzzy logic was integrated within the model, using partial degrees of membership and probabilistic analysis, to address uncertainties inherent to healthcare risk evaluation. The evaluation model was tested with healthcare professionals active in the field of risk management in clinical practice and compared with the risk matrix.

Results

The designed evaluation model utilizes multicriteria decision-making while encompassing the risk matrix framework to boost user understanding and enable meaningful comparison of results. Compared with the risk matrix, the model provided similar or marginally higher risk-level evaluations. The use of degrees of membership enables evaluators to articulate a wide range of plausible risk consequences, which are often overlooked or ambiguously addressed in the traditional risk matrix approach.

Discussion and Conclusions

The evaluation model demonstrates increased transparency of the decision-making process and facilitates in-depth analysis of the evaluation results. The utilization of degrees of membership revealed distinct strategies for handling uncertainty among participants, highlighting the weaknesses of using single value evaluation approach for the presented and similar decision problems. The presented approach is not limited to healthcare-related risk evaluation, but has the capacity to improve risk evaluation practices in diverse settings.

Responsive patient care in Israel: A qualitative study of hospital rules and regulations

Hospital rules and regulations can contribute to standardizing care, streamlining processes, and improving the quality of care. Over the past decade, hospitals in Israel have introduced written rules and regulations for staff that provide guidance on quality control, patient safety, and the patient-provider relationship. This study aimed to explore how these written guidelines, when implemented, can promote responsive care for inpatients. Using a thematic analysis, the study analyzed the content of staff guidelines from six Israeli hospitals. The analysis found that hospital rules and regulations provide similar, relatively precise instructions with regard to improving the responsiveness to and dignity of care of patients. The guidelines address three essential aspects of responsiveness - disclosing medical information and respecting the patients' autonomy and physical space. The guidelines highlight that healthcare providers should implement security measures to safeguard medical information, respect patients' autonomy, involve patients in decision-making, and provide adequate physical space to maintain their privacy and modesty. The guidelines contribute to ensuring patients' legal and ethical rights. Policymakers should consider introducing and implementing the dimensions of responsiveness that were stressed by Israeli hospitals' rules and regulations. Further research is needed to confirm the relevance of the various rules and regulations for improving the quality of care provided to patients.

Impact of Fee For Service on the Efficiency and Survival of Seguro Popular's Patients With Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia in Mexico

PURPOSE

Cost containment and efficiency in the provision of health care are primary concerns for health systems that aim to provide affordable, high-quality care. Between 2005 and 2015, Seguro Poplar's Fund against Catastrophic Expenditures (FPGC) funded ALL treatment in Mexico. Before January 1, 2011, FPGC reimbursed a fixed amount per patient according to risk. In 2011, the per capita reimbursement method changed to fee for service. We used this natural experiment to estimate the impact of the reimbursement policy change on average expenditure and quality of care for ALL treatment in Mexico.

METHODS

We used nationwide reimbursement data from the Seguro Poplar's FPGC from 2005 to 2015. We created a patient cohort to assess 3-year survival and estimate the average reimbursement before and after the fee-for-service policy. We examined survival and expenditure impacts, controlling for patients' and providers' characteristics, including sex, risk (standard and high), the volume of patients served, type of institution (federally funded v other), and level of care. To quantify the impact, we used a regression discontinuity approach.

RESULTS

The average reimbursement for standard-risk patients in the 3-year survival cohort was $16,512 US dollars (USD; 95% CI, 16,042 to 17,032) before 2011 and $10,205 USD (95% CI, 4,659 to 12,541) under the fee-for-service reimbursement scheme after 2011. The average annual reimbursement per patient decreased by 136% among high-risk patients. The reduction was also significant for the standard-risk cohort, although the magnitude was substantially smaller (34%).

CONCLUSION

As Mexico's government is currently restructuring the health system, our study provides evidence of the efficiency and effectiveness of the funding mechanism in the Mexican context. It also serves as a proof of concept for using administrative data to evaluate economic performance and quality of care of publicly funded health programs.

Causes for Medical Errors in Obstetrics and Gynaecology

Background: Quality strategies, interventions, and frameworks have been developed to facilitate a better understanding of healthcare systems. Reporting adverse events is one of these strategies. Gynaecology and obstetrics are one of the specialties with many adverse events. To understand the main causes of medical errors in gynaecology and obstetrics and how they could be prevented, we conducted this systematic review. Methods: This systematic review was performed in compliance with the Prisma 2020 guidelines. We searched several databases for relevant studies (Jan 2010-May 2023). Studies were included if they indicated the presence of any potential risk factor at the hospital level for medical errors or adverse events in gynaecology or obstetrics. Results: We included 26 articles in the quantitative analysis of this review. Most of these (n = 12) are cross-sectional studies; eight are case-control studies, and six are cohort studies. One of the most frequently reported contributing factors is delay in healthcare. In addition, the availability of products and trained staff, team training, and communication are often reported to contribute to near-misses/maternal deaths. Conclusions: All risk factors that were found in our review imply several categories of contributing factors regarding: (1) delay of care, (2) coordination and management of care, and (3) scarcity of supply, personnel, and knowledge.

Health outcomes in primary care: a 20-year evidence map of randomized controlled trials

OBJECTIVE

To quantify the different types of health outcomes assessed as primary outcomes in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in the primary care (PC) setting during the last 20 years and identify whether potential gaps exist in specific types of health care and types of intervention.

METHODS

We systematically searched PubMed, Scopus, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, from January 2000 to September 2020 for published RCTs in PC. We recorded characteristics of eligible studies and mapped evidence by health outcome category (patient health outcomes, health services outcomes); and for each outcome category, by types of health care (preventive, acute, chronic, palliative), and by types of intervention (drug, behavioural, on structure, and on process). For RCTs assessing patient health outcomes as primary outcomes, we further mapped using the quality-of-care dimensions, that is, effectiveness, safety, and patient-centredness.

RESULTS

Of the 518 eligible RCTs in PC, 357 (68.9%) evaluated a patient health outcome as the primary outcome, and 161 (31.1%) evaluated only health services outcomes as primary outcomes. Many focused on population with chronic illness (224 trials; 43.2%) and evaluated interventions on processes of health care (239 trials; 46.1%). Research gaps identified include preventive and palliative care, behavioural interventions, and safety and patient-centredness outcomes as primary outcomes.

CONCLUSION

Our evidence map showed research gaps in certain types of health care and interventions. It also showed research gaps in assessing safety and measures to place patient at the centre of health care delivery as primary outcomes.

Investigation of technical quality of antenatal and perinatal services in a nationally representative sample of health facilities in Nepal

BACKGROUND

Access to routine antenatal and perinatal services is improved in the last two decades in Nepal. However, gaps remain in coverage and quality of care delivered from the health facilities. This study investigated the delivery of technical quality antenatal and perinatal services from health facilities and their associated determinants in Nepal.

METHODS

Data for this study were derived from the Nepal Health Facility Survey 2015. The World Health Organization's Service Availability and Readiness Assessment framework was adopted to assess the technical quality of antenatal and perinatal services of health facilities. Outcome variables included technical quality scores of i) 269 facilities providing antenatal services and ii) 109 facilities providing childbirth and postnatal care services (perinatal care). Technical quality scores of health facilities were estimated adapting recommended antenatal and perinatal interventions. Independent variables included locations and types of health facilities and their management functions (e.g., supervision). We conducted a linear regression analysis to identify the determinants of better technical quality of health services in health facilities. Beta coefficients were exponentiated into odds ratios (ORs) and reported with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). The significance level was set at p-value < 0.05.

RESULTS

The mean score of the technical quality of health facilities for each outcome variable (antenatal and perinatal services) was 0.55 (out of 1.00). Compared to province one, facilities of Madhesh province had 4% lower odds (adjusted OR = 0.96; 95%CI: 0.92, 0.99) of providing better quality antenatal services, while health facilities of Gandaki province had higher odds of providing better quality antenatal services (aOR = 1.05; 95% CI: 1.01, 1.10). Private facilities had higher odds (aOR = 1.13; 95% CI: 1.03, 1.23) of providing better quality perinatal services compared to public facilities.

CONCLUSIONS

Private facilities provide better quality antenatal and perinatal health services than public facilities, while health facilities of Madhesh province provide poor quality perinatal services. Health system needs to implement tailored strategies, including recruiting health workers, supervision and onsite coaching and access to necessary equipment and medicine in the facilities of Madhesh province. Health system inputs (trained human resources, equipment and supplies) are needed in the public facilities. Extending the safe delivery incentive programme to the privately managed facilities could also improve access to better quality health services in Nepal.

Fragility and challenges of health systems in pandemic: lessons from India's second wave of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)

The unprecedented healthcare demand due to sudden outbreak of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has almost collapsed the health care systems especially in the developing world. Given the disastrous outbreak of COVID-19 second wave in India, the health system of country was virtually at the brink of collapse. Therefore, to identify the factors that resulted into breakdown and the challenges, Indian healthcare system faced during the second wave of COVID-19 pandemic, this paper analysed the health system challenges in India and the way forward in accordance with the six building blocks of world health organization (WHO). Applying integrated review approach, we found that the factors such as poor infrastructure, inadequate financing, lack of transparency and poor healthcare management resulted into the overstretching of healthcare system in India. Although health system in India faced these challenges from the very beginning, but early lessons from first wave should have been capitalized to avert the much deeper crisis in the second wave of the pandemic. To sum-up given the likely future challenges of pandemic, while healthcare should be prioritized with adequate financing, strong capacity-building measures and integration of public and private sectors in India. Likewise fiscal stimulus, risk assessment, data availability and building of human resources chain are other key factors to be strengthened for mitigating the future healthcare crisis in country.

Development and Early Experience of a Primary Care Learning Collaborative in a Large Health Care System

Introduction:

Primary care clinicians are presented with hundreds of new clinical recommendations and guidelines. To consider practice change clinicians must identify relevant information and develop a contextual framework. Too much attention to information irrelevant to one’s practice results in wasted resources. Too little results in care gaps. A small group of primary care clinicians in a large health system sought to address the problem of vetting new information and providing peer reviewed context. This was done by engaging colleagues across the system though a primary care learning collaborative.

Methods:

The collaborative was a grass roots initiative between community and academic-based clinicians. They invited all the system’s primary care clinicians to participate. They selected new recommendations or guidelines and used surveys as the principal communication instrument. Surveys shared practice experience and also invited members to give narrative feedback regarding their acceptance of variation in care relate to the topic. A description of the collaborative along with its development, processes, and evolution are discussed. Process changes to address needs during the COVID-19 pandemic including expanded information sharing was necessary.

Results:

Collaborative membership reached across 5 states and included family medicine, internal medicine, and pediatrics. Members found involvement with the collaborative useful. Less variation in care was thought important for public health crises: the COVID pandemic and opioid epidemic. Greater practice variation was thought acceptable for adherence to multispecialty guidelines, such as diabetes, lipid management, and adult ADHD care. Process changes during the pandemic resulted in more communications between members to avoid practice gaps.

Conclusion:

An internet-based learning collaborative in a health system had good engagement from its members. Using novel methods, it was able to provide members with feedback related to the importance of new practice recommendations as perceived by their peers. Greater standardization was thought necessary when adopting measures to address public health crisis, and less necessary when addressing multispecialty guidelines. By employing a learning collaborative, this group was able to keep members interested and engaged. During the first year of the COVID pandemic the collaborative also served as a vehicle to share timely information.

Did paying drugs misuse treatment providers for outcomes lead to unintended consequences for hospital admissions? Difference-in-differences analysis of a pay-for-performance scheme in England

AIMS

To estimate how a scheme to pay substance misuse treatment service providers according to treatment outcomes affected hospital admissions.

DESIGN

A controlled, quasi-experimental (difference-in-differences) observational study using negative binomial regression.

SETTING

Hospitals in all 149 organisational areas in England for the period 2009-2010 to 2015-2016.

PARTICIPANTS

572 545 patients admitted to hospital with a diagnosis indicating drug misuse, defined based on International Classification of Diseases 10th Revision (ICD-10) diagnosis codes (37 964 patients in 8 intervention areas and 534 581 in 141 comparison areas).

INTERVENTION AND COMPARATORS

Linkage of provider payments to recovery outcome indicators in 8 intervention organisational areas compared with all 141 comparison organisational areas in England. Outcome indicators included: abstinence from presenting substance, abstinent completion of treatment and non-re-presentation to treatment in the 12 months following completion.

MEASUREMENTS

Annual counts of hospital admissions, emergency admissions and admissions including a diagnosis indicating drugs misuse. Covariates included age, sex, ethnic origin and deprivation.

FINDINGS

For 37 245 patients in the intervention areas, annual emergency admissions were 1.073 times higher during the operation of the scheme compared with non-intervention areas (95% CI = 1.049; 1.097). There were an estimated additional 3 352 emergency admissions in intervention areas during the scheme. These findings were robust to a range of secondary analyses.

CONCLUSION

A programme in England from 2012 to 2014 to pay substance misuse treatment service providers according to treatment outcomes appeared to increase emergency hospital admissions.

The future of hospital quality of care policy: A multi-stakeholder discrete choice experiment in Flanders, Belgium

BACKGROUND

Collaboration between policymakers, patients and healthcare workers in hospital quality of care policy setting can improve the integration of new initiatives. The aim of this study was to quantify preferences for various characteristics of a future quality policy in a broad group of stakeholders.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

450 policymakers, clinicians, nurses, patient representatives and hospital board members in Flanders (Belgium) participated in five discrete choice experiments (DCE) on quality control, quality improvement, inspection, patient incidents and transparency. For each DCE, various attributes and levels were defined from a literature review and interviews with 12 international quality and patient safety experts.

RESULTS

For the attributes with the highest relative importance, participants exhibited a strong preference for quality control by an independent national organization and coordination of quality improvement initiatives at the level of hospital networks. The individual hospital was chosen over the government for setting up an action plan following patient complaints. Respondents also strongly preferred mandatory reporting of severe patient incidents and transparency by publicly reporting quality indicators at the hospital level.

CONCLUSIONS

A future quality model should focus on a multicomponent approach with external quality control, improvement actions on hospital network level and public transparency. DCEs provide an opportunity to incorporate the attitudes and views for individual components of a new policy recommendation.