Evaluating the impact of continuous quality improvement methods at hospitals in Tanzania: a cluster-randomized trial

Use of Patient-Reported Data within the Acute Healthcare Context: A Scoping Review

Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), patient-reported experience measures (PREMs) and patient satisfaction surveys provide important information on how care can be improved. However, data collection does not always translate to changes in practice or service delivery. This scoping review aimed to collect, map and report on the use of collected patient-reported data used within acute healthcare contexts for improvement to care or processes. Using JBI methods, an extensive search was undertaken of multiple health databases and trial registries for published and unpublished studies. The concepts of interest included the types and characteristics of published patient experience and PROMs research, with a specific focus on the ways in which data have been applied to clinical practice. Barriers and facilitators to the use of collected data were also explored. From 4057 records, 86 papers were included. Most research was undertaken in North America, Canada or the UK. The Hospital Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems tool (HCAHPS) was used most frequently for measuring patient satisfaction. Where reported, data were applied to improve patient-centred care and utilization of health resources. Gaps in the use of patient data within hospital services are noticeable. Engaging management and improving staff capability are needed to overcome barriers to implementation.

Sustainability of quality improvement teams in selected regional referral hospitals in Tanzania

Objective

The aim of this study was to determine the sustainability of hospital quality improvement teams and to assess factors influencing their sustainability in the regional referral hospital in Tanzania.

Design

A cross-sectional study was conducted between April and August of 2018.

Setting and participants

The study was conducted in four selected regional referral hospitals in Tanzania. All members of the quality improvement teams available during the study period were recruited.

Intervention

Quality improvement teams and their activities.

Main outcome measure

The primary outcome was sustainability total scores. The secondary outcomes were process, staff and organizational sustainability scores. The sustainability of quality improvement teams was assessed by using the National Health Service Institute for Innovation and Improvement Sustainability Model self-assessment tool.

Results

The overall mean sustainability score was 59.08 (95% CI: 53.69–64.46). Tanga Regional Referral Hospital had the highest mean sustainability score of 66.15 (95% CI: 55.12–77.18). Mbeya Regional Referral Hospital obtained the lowest mean sustainability score of 52.49 (95% CI: 42.96–62.01). The process domain had the highest proportionate mean sustainability score of 22.46 (95% CI: 20.58–24.33) across four hospitals. The staff domain recorded the lowest proportionate sustainability score of 27.28 (95% CI: 24.76–29.80).

Conclusions

Perceived less involvement of senior leadership (hospital management teams) and clinical leadership (heads of clinical departments) and infrastructure limitation appeared to negatively affect the sustainability of the hospital quality improvement teams. Our study underscores the importance of establishing a permanent and fully resourced Quality Improvement Unit—with team members employed as full-time staff.

Performance of quality improvement teams and associated factors in selected regional referral hospitals in Tanzania: a cross-sectional study

Introduction

quality improvement teams facilitate improvement in the performance of the health facilities and simultaneously improving the quality of health services. There is scanty information on the factors associated with performance of quality improvement teams. This study aimed to assess the perceptions of members of the quality improvement teams on the factors influencing the performance of quality improvement teams in regional referral hospitals in Tanzania.

Methods

a cross-sectional study was conducted in four regional referral hospitals in Tanzania. We used self-administered questionnaires to collect data from 61 members of quality improvement teams. Descriptive statistics were used to assess the perceived factors influencing team performance. Bivariate and multivariate logistic regression was used to test the association between perceptions of the team members and factors associated with team performance.

Results

the overall mean perception score on team performance was high at 27.51 ± 4.62. Five factors namely: training (83.6%); communication (75.1%); team cohesiveness (71.5%); clarity of roles and responsibility (70.2%); team size and composition (65.5%); and self-assessment and learning (56.2%) were considered as the main drivers of team performance. Inadequate management support obtained the lowest score (36.1%). Multivariable regression analysis established a significant association between training, communication, clarity of roles and responsibilities, team size and composition, self-assessment and learning, management support and team performance.

Conclusion

inadequate management support to the team was found to be a barrier to team performance. Managerial interventions should focus on provision of coaching and mentoring to the team while addressing resource challenges affecting the team performance.

Perceptions of hospital staff on the performance of Quality Improvement teams in the regional referral hospitals in Tanzania: A cross sectional study

BACKGROUND

To ensure patient-centered quality care for all citizens, Quality Improvement (QI) teams have been established across all public hospitals in Tanzania. However, little is known about how hospital staff perceive the performance of hospital QI teams in Tanzania. This study assessed the perceptions of hospital staff of the performance of QI teams in selected regional referral hospitals in Tanzania.

METHODS

This cross-sectional study was conducted in four selected regional referral hospitals between April and August 2018. A self-administered questionnaire was used to collect data from 385 hospital staff in the selected hospitals. Measures of central tendency, proportions and frequencies were used to assess level of perception of hospital staff. Bivariate and multivariate logistic regression was used to test the association between the perceptions of hospital staff of the performance of QI teams and their socio-demographic factors.

RESULTS

The overall mean perception score of the performance of QI teams was 4.84 ± 1.25. Hospital staff aged 35 and over (n = 130; 68%), female hospital staff (n = 144; 64%), staff in clinical units (n = 136; 63%) and staff with post-secondary education (n = 175; 63%) perceived that the performance of QI teams was good. Improved hospital cleanliness was viewed as strength of QI teams, whilst inadequate sharing of information and inadequate reduction in patient waiting time were considered as weaknesses of QI team performance. Bivariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses showed that there was no statistical association between the perceptions of hospital staff and their socio-demographic characteristics.

CONCLUSION

The overall perception of hospital staff of the performance of QI teams was good, with the main limitation being sharing of hospital QI plans with hospital staff. Hospital staff should be involved in the development and implementation of hospital QI plans, which would promote a positive perception of staff of the performance of QI teams and enhance sustainability of QI teams.

Patient feedback to improve quality of patient-centred care in public hospitals: a systematic review of the evidence

Background

To review systematically the published literature relating to interventions informed by patient feedback for improvement to quality of care in hospital settings.

Methods

A systematic search was performed in the CINAHL, EMBASE, PsyInfo, MEDLINE, Cochrane Libraries, SCOPUS and Web of Science databases for English-language publications from January 2008 till October 2018 using a combination of MeSH-terms and keywords related to patient feedback, quality of health care, patient-centred care, program evaluation and public hospitals. The quality appraisal of the studies was conducted with the MMAT and the review protocol was published on PROSPERO. Narrative synthesis was used for evaluation of the effectiveness of the interventions on patient-centred quality of care.

Results

Twenty papers reporting 20 studies met the inclusion criteria, of these, there was one cluster RCT, three before and after studies, four cross-sectional studies and 12 organisational case studies. In the quality appraisal, 11 studies were rated low, five medium and only two of high methodological quality. Two studies could not be appraised because insufficient information was provided. The papers reported on interventions to improve communication with patients, professional practices in continuity of care and care transitions, responsiveness to patients, patient education, the physical hospital environment, use of patient feedback by staff and on quality improvement projects. However, quantitative outcomes were only provided for interventions in the areas of communication, professional practices in continuity of care and care transitions and responsiveness to patients. Multi-component interventions which targeted both individual and organisational levels were more effective than single interventions. Outcome measures reported in the studies were patient experiences across various diverse dimensions including, communication, responsiveness, coordination of and access to care, or patient satisfaction with waiting times, physical environment and staff courtesy.

Conclusion

Overall, it was found that there is limited evidence on the effectiveness of interventions, because few have been tested in well-designed trials, very few papers described the theoretical basis on which the intervention had been developed. Further research is needed to understand the choice and mechanism of action of the interventions used to improve patient experience.

Development and validation of a generic patient experience instrument for measuring specialist outpatient service in Hong Kong

OBJECTIVE

The measurement of patients' experience is an important performance indicator of health care service quality. A reliable and validated instrument to elicit patients' experience is an important step. This study aimed to develop a generic instrument to elicit patients' experience in specialist outpatient clinic provision with a rigorous and systematic methodology.

DESIGN

The instrument framework was developed according to findings of a literature review, patient focus group discussions, individual patient in-depth interviews and expert discussion. The framework was tested for psychometric performance with a cross-sectional telephone survey in terms of practicality, validity, reliability and responsiveness.

SETTING

26 Public specialist outpatient clinics in Hong Kong were selected.

PARTICIPANTS

Cantonese speaking patients aged 18 or above. Intervention(s): None. Main outcome measure(s): A validated generic patient experience questionnaire measuring Specialist Outpatient Service (SOPEQ).

RESULTS

A proportional sample total of 513 patients from 26 specialist outpatient clinics were recruited, response rate of 56%. The findings indicated that the instrument is practicable and concise. A structure of nine dimensions with 47 items structure was confirmed based on exploratory factor analysis and content validity. These items showed satisfactory internal reliability consistency (α = 0.793) and test-retest reliability ranged from 0.618 to 0.829.

CONCLUSIONS

The SOPEQ was established with satisfactory psychometric properties. A valid and reliable measure to evaluate patients' experience is an important step in providing valuable input from patients' perspective for policy makers to improve patient-centred services. It also serves as a platform to engage patients and thereby, in improving health care quality and enhancing health outcomes.

Towards improved health service quality in Tanzania: contribution of a supportive supervision approach to increased quality of primary healthcare

Background

Universal Health Coverage only leads to the desired health outcomes if quality of health services is ensured. In Tanzania, quality has been a major concern for many years, including the problem of ineffective and inadequate routine supportive supervision of healthcare providers by council health management teams. To address this, we developed and assessed an approach to improve quality of primary healthcare through enhanced routine supportive supervision.

Methods

Mixed methods were used, combining trends of quantitative quality of care measurements with qualitative data mainly collected through in-depth interviews. The former allowed for identification of drivers of quality improvements and the latter investigated the perceived contribution of the new supportive supervision approach to these improvements.

Results

The results showed that the new approach managed to address quality issues that could be solved either solely by the healthcare provider, or in collaboration with the council. The new approach was able to improve and maintain crucial primary healthcare quality standards across different health facility level and owner categories in various contexts.

Conclusion

Together with other findings reported in companion papers, we could show that the new supportive supervision approach not only served to assess quality of primary healthcare, but also to improve and maintain crucial primary healthcare quality standards. The new approach therefore presents a powerful tool to support, guide and drive quality improvement measures within council. It can thus be considered a suitable option to make routine supportive supervision more effective and adequate.

Patient experiences: a systematic review of quality improvement interventions in a hospital setting

Purpose: In the era of value-based healthcare, one strives for the most optimal outcomes and experiences from the perspective of the patient. So, patient experiences have become a key quality indicator for healthcare. While these are supposed to drive quality improvement (QI), their use and effectiveness for this purpose has been questioned. The aim of this systematic review was to provide insight into QI interventions used in a hospital setting and their effects on improving patient experiences, and possible barriers and promoters for QI work.

Methods: Prisma guidelines were used to design this review. International academic literature was searched in Embase, Medline OvidSP, Web of Science, Cochrane Central, PubMed Publisher, Scopus, PsycInfo, and Google Scholar. In total, 3,289 studies were retrieved and independently screened by the first two authors for eligibility and methodological quality. Data was extracted on the study purpose, setting, design, targeted patient experience domains, QI strategies, results of QI, barriers, and promotors for QI.

Results: Twenty-one pre–post intervention studies were included for review. The methodological quality of the included studies was assessed using a Critical Appraisal Skills Program (CASP) Tool. QI strategies used were staff education, patient education, audit and feedback, clinician reminders, organizational change, and policy change. Twenty studies reported improvement in patient experience, 14 studies of the 21 included studies reported statistical significance. Most studies (n=17) reported data-related barriers (eg, questionnaire quality), professional, and/or organizational barriers (eg, skepticism among staff), and 14 studies mentioned specific promoters (eg, engaging staff and patients) for QI.

Conclusions: Several patient experience domains are targeted for QI using diverse strategies and methodological approaches. Most studies reported at least one improvement and also barriers and promoters that may influence QI work. Future research should address these barriers and promoters in order to enhance methodological quality and improve patient experiences.

Health workers' experiences of collaborative quality improvement for maternal and newborn care in rural Tanzanian health facilities: A process evaluation using the integrated 'Promoting Action on Research Implementation in Health Services' framework

Background

Quality Improvement (QI) approaches are increasingly used to bridge the quality gap in maternal and newborn care (MNC) in Sub Saharan Africa. Health workers typically serve as both recipients and implementers of QI activities; their understanding, motivation, and level of involvement largely determining the potential effect. In support of efforts to harmonise and integrate the various QI approaches implemented in parallel in Tanzanian health facilities, our objective was to investigate how different components of a collaborative QI intervention were understood and experienced by health workers, and therefore contributed positively to its mechanisms of effect.

Materials and methods

A qualitative process evaluation of a collaborative QI intervention for MNC in rural Tanzania was carried out. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 16 health workers in 13 purposively sampled health facilities. A deductive theory-driven qualitative content analysis was employed using the integrated Promoting Action on Research Implementation in Health services (i-PARIHS) framework as a lens with its four constructs innovation, recipients, facilitation, and context as guiding themes.

Results

Health workers valued the high degree of fit between QI topics and their everyday practice and appreciated the intervention’s comprehensive approach. The use of run-charts to monitor progress was well understood and experienced as motivating. The importance and positive experience of on-site mentoring and coaching visits to individual health facilities was expressed by the majority of health workers. Many described the parallel implementation of various health programs as a challenge.

Conclusion

Components of QI approaches that are well understood and experienced as supportive by health workers in everyday practice may enhance mechanisms of effect and result in more significant change. A focus on such components may also guide harmonisation, to avoid duplication and the implementation of parallel programs, and country ownership of QI approaches in resource limited settings.