Développement d’indicateurs de qualité au sein des établissements de santé : le projet COMPAQH

[Regulatory science in public health: What are we talking about?]

This article sheds light on a concept little known to public health actors in France: regulatory science, used to describe the range of scientific activities used to produce the knowledge mobilized to support, develop or adapt public policy decisions. The objective is to understand how the expression appeared in the mid-1980s and was formalized into a sociological concept by the American writer Sheila Jasanoff in 1990, and has gradually imposed itself in American, Japanese and European regulatory agencies as a new scientific discipline. The article examines the evolution of the concept and the various approaches proposed to define regulatory science. It highlights its hybrid and heterogeneous nature, underlining the different characteristics that the expression covers according to the institution which formulates it (FDA, EMA, PMDA) and the scope of application that it covers. Based on concrete examples of the application of regulatory science practices in three broad areas of health risk, the paper focuses on the role of research in the decision-making process by showing how the emergence of new methods designed to strengthen the regulatory capacities of regulators and the role of academic communities associated with this approach, contribute to the strengthening of public health policies in France and worldwide.

Development of a 'ready-to-use' tool that includes preventability, for the assessment of adverse drug events in oncology

Background Adverse drug events (ADEs) occur frequently in oncology and justify continuous assessment and monitoring. There are several methods for detecting them, but the trigger tool method seems the most appropriate. Although a generic tool exists, its use for ADEs in oncology has not been convincing. The development of a focused version is therefore necessary. Objective To provide an oncology-focused trigger tool that evaluates the prevalence, harm, and preventability in a standardised method for pragmatic use in ADE surveillance. Setting Hospitals with cancer care in France. Method The tool has been constructed in two steps: (1) constitution of an oncology-centred list of ADEs; 30 pharmacists/practitioners in cancer care from nine hospitals selected a list of ADEs using a method of agreement adapted from the RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method; and (2) construction of three standardised dimensions for the characterisation of each ADE (including causality, severity, and preventability). Main outcome measure The main outcome measure was validation of the tool, including preventability criteria. Results The tool is composed of a final list of 15 ADEs. For each ADE, a 'reviewer form' has been designed and validated by the panel. It comprises (1) the trigger(s), (2) flowcharts to guide the reviewer, (3) criteria for grading harm, and (4) a standardised assessment of preventability with 6-14 closed sentences for each ADE in terms of therapeutic management and/or prevention of side-effects. Conclusion A complete 'ready-to-use' tool for ADE monitoring in oncology has been developed that allows the assessment of three standardised dimensions.

Building on the EGIPPS performance assessment: the multipolar framework as a heuristic to tackle the complexity of performance of public service oriented health care organisations

Background

Performance of health care systems is a key concern of policy makers and health service managers all over the world. It is also a major challenge, given its multidimensional nature that easily leads to conceptual and methodological confusion. This is reflected by a scarcity of models that comprehensively analyse health system performance.

Discussion

In health, one of the most comprehensive performance frameworks was developed by the team of Leggat and Sicotte. Their framework integrates 4 key organisational functions (goal attainment, production, adaptation to the environment, and values and culture) and the tensions between these functions.

We modified this framework to better fit the assessment of the performance of health organisations in the public service domain and propose an analytical strategy that takes it into the social complexity of health organisations. The resulting multipolar performance framework (MPF) is a meta-framework that facilitates the analysis of the relations and interactions between the multiple actors that influence the performance of health organisations.

Summary

Using the MPF in a dynamic reiterative mode not only helps managers to identify the bottlenecks that hamper performance, but also the unintended effects and feedback loops that emerge. Similarly, it helps policymakers and programme managers at central level to better anticipate the potential results and side effects of and required conditions for health policies and programmes and to steer their implementation accordingly.

[Anaesthesiologic implications of the radial approach in interventional cardiology]

The development of the radial approach in interventional cardiology is one of the reasons for the increase in demands for anaesthesia services in the cardiac catheterization room. The technique in which sedation is carried out in this particular environment has gradually changed, in parallel with the development of new technologies in anaesthesia, particularly suited to achieving short sedation in spontaneous ventilation. This article evaluates this issue and suggests an updated therapeutic approach.

[The COMPAQH project: researches on quality indicators in hospitals]

After three years, the coordination de la mesure de la performance pour l'amélioration de la qualité hospitalière (COMPAQH) project can deliver its first findings and consider new perspectives of development. Which indicators are diffused? Under which criteria are they assessed? Which interhospital variability is observed? How to consider their application into hospitals? Which balance can we define between internal and external use? And finally, which consideration can we give to this program of quality measurement? This article addresses these different questions, giving a state of the development of this program.

Do registro ao indicador: gestão da produção da informação assistencial nos hospitais

A valorização da utilização de indicadores assistenciais no monitoramento do desempenho dos sistemas de serviços de saúde cresceu de forma significativa nas últimas décadas. A expansão do Sistema Único de Saúde/SUS e do Sistema de Saúde Suplementar, e as formas de gestão adotadas estimularam o uso de indicadores na avaliação do desempenho, qualidade e segurança nos hospitais, sendo propostos sistemas de indicadores. Não houve uma correspondente preocupação com as condições de produção dos dados e informações para esses indicadores nos serviços de saúde. O artigo discute algumas das condições necessárias para a qualidade nos indicadores para a gestão da assistência nos hospitais: uma cultura de valorização da informação clínica, administrativa e de pesquisa, compartilhada por todos, e a adequada gestão dos registros clínicos, estatísticas hospitalares e sistemas de informações hospitalares. Não existem propostas prontas para a gestão da informação nos hospitais, fazendo-se necessário desenvolver uma capacidade institucional de incorporar e utilizar, na forma mais adequada para cada instituição e contexto, competências e recursos materiais e humanos diversificados, para que a gestão da informação se transforme em um processo dinâmico e parte da gestão do serviço como um todo.

[Quality criteria in medicine: which limits?]

This article aims to develop a critical appraisal of the criteria's development in medicine. The COMPAQH (Coordination for Measuring Performance and Assuring Quality in Hospitals) project (Ministry of Health/ High Authority of Health/ National Institute of Medical Research) helps to support this analysis. This project based on the test of 42 Quality indicators (QI) gives findings not only about the manner to build criteria, but also to interpret and diffuse results among physicians and hospital managers. Criteria must be elaborated in a pragmatic way. They must be in compliance with practice guidelines supported by scientific evidences. The associated risk is to create and develop a normative medicine. Collaboration with professional societies may be useful in preventing this risk.