Reinventing the Clinical Audit in a Pediatric Oncology Network

Providing equal access to pediatric cancer patients regardless of their geographic location is a major goal of the Affiliate Program at St. Jude Children's Research Hospital (St. Jude). Thirty-five percent of new cancer patients enrolled on St. Jude clinical trials reside in the communities of 1 of the 8 affiliate clinics, which serve 9 states in the Southeast and Midwest United States. The affiliate clinics support participant recruitment for clinical trials and the geographic extension of St. Jude clinical care. To ensure high-quality pediatric cancer care, we instituted on-site clinical audits, however, we did not see improvement in clinical outcomes including the time to antibiotics in febrile immunocompromised patients, consistent hand-off communication, consistent documentation of oral chemotherapy, and adherence to a central line bundle in the ambulatory setting. We then moved to a more comprehensive clinical audit which involved self-reflection of clinic staff members, transparent data sharing, development of local quality champions, and engagement of senior leaders. The comprehensive approach was more successful in improving clinical outcomes including the time to antibiotics, hand-off communication, documentation of oral chemotherapy administration, and adherence to a central line bundle in the ambulatory setting.

Learning to make a difference for chILD: Value creation through network collaboration and team science

Addressing the recognized challenges and inequalities in providing high quality healthcare for rare diseases such as children's interstitial lung disease (chILD) requires collaboration across institutional, geographical, discipline, and system boundaries. The Children's Interstitial Lung Disease Respiratory Network of Australia and New Zealand (chILDRANZ) is an example of a clinical network that brings together multidisciplinary health professionals for collaboration, peer learning, and advocacy with the goal of improving the diagnosis and management of this group of rare and ultra-rare conditions. This narrative review explores the multifaceted benefits arising from social learning spaces within rare disease clinical networks by applying the value creation framework. The operation of the chILDRANZ network is used as an example across the framework to highlight how value is generated, realized, and transferred within such collaborative clinical and research networks. The community of practice formed in the chILDRANZ multidisciplinary meetings provides a strong example of social learning that engages with the uncertainty inherent in rare disease diagnosis and management and pays attention to generate new knowledge and best practice to make a difference for children and families living with chILD. This review underscores international calls for further investment in, and support of, collaborative clinical networks and virtual centers of excellence for rare disease.

National clinical programmes in the Republic of Ireland: a qualitative study of acute hospitals

Background

The national clinical programmes (NCPs) were established in 2010 to achieve three objectives, namely: improve quality, access and cost effectiveness. Limited research exists on their implementation in the Republic of Ireland (ROI). This qualitative study identified key stakeholders' perceptions on (a) implementation thus far, and (b) conditions perceived necessary for implementation in acute hospitals.

Aims

The overall aim of this research was to undertake an in-depth study to explore from the perspectives of key stakeholders, their perceptions on implementation of the national clinical programmes, thus far, in relation to three overarching objectives (to improve quality, access, cost effectiveness) and what are the conditions necessary for their implementation in the Republic of Ireland's acute hospitals.

Methods

Twenty participants were interviewed using face-to-face audio-recorded semi-structured interviews. Transcribed data were coded and analysed, and a number of themes emerged from the dataset relating to the study aims.

Results

Implementation was perceived as being inconsistent. Outcomes were identified as: best practice guidelines, models of care, protocols, pathways; education & training; new services; improved discharges; improved patient outcomes; reduced length of stay; timely access; reduced waiting lists; cost effectiveness and other intangible outcomes. Sixteen conditions, under four themes, were perceived necessary for implementation, namely: Governance - structure, audit & monitoring, senior management support, accountability, and clear objectives and expectations; Communication - visible face-to-face engagement, internal awareness, and external awareness; Leadership - programme level, national level, hospital level, and professional level; Resources - budget, staff, information technology, training, skills, and competency.

Conclusions

This study adds to the existing limited body of knowledge on implementation of the NCPs in the acute hospitals in the ROI while contributing to the wider international literature in this area. The study provides hitherto unreported knowledge on the conditions that are perceived necessary for implementation. Novel in the ROI context is the perceived necessity to condense the number of NCPs, placing greater emphasis on (a) the need to structurally integrate the NCPs across the continuum of care, and (b) the importance of communication through visible face-to-face engagement. This study concludes that significant progress has been made by the NCPs towards meeting the objectives, albeit to varying degrees. There is a strong perception that the NCPs should remain, and that addressing the conditions perceived necessary for implementation in the areas of governance, communications, leadership and resources by both top-down senior health officials and bottom-up front-line hospital staff would significantly enhance the ability of the NCPs to meet objectives and implementation. It provides the ROI health services with valuable information to inform future reform, strategic planning and NCP implementation.

Tackling the wicked problem of health networks: the design of an evaluation framework

Networks are everywhere. Health systems and public health settings are experimenting with multifarious forms. Governments and providers are heavily investing in networks with an expectation that they will facilitate the delivery of better services and improve health outcomes. Yet, we lack a suitable conceptual framework to evaluate the effectiveness and sustainability of clinical and health networks. This paper aims to present such a framework to assist with rigorous research and policy analysis. The framework was designed as part of a project to evaluate the effectiveness and sustainability of health networks. We drew on systematic reviews of the literature on networks and communities of practice in health care, and on theoretical and evidence-based studies of the evaluation of health and non-health networks. Using brainstorming and mind-mapping techniques in expert advisory group sessions, we assessed existing network evaluation frameworks and considered their application to extant health networks. Feedback from stakeholders in network studies that we conducted was incorporated. The framework encompasses network goals, characteristics and relationships at member, network and community levels, and then looks at network outcomes, taking into account intervening variables. Finally, the short-term, medium-term and long-term effectiveness of the network needs to be assessed. The framework provides an overarching contribution to network evaluation. It is sufficiently comprehensive to account for many theoretical and evidence-based contributions to the literature on how networks operate and is sufficiently flexible to assess different kinds of health networks across their life-cycle at community, network and member levels. We outline the merits and limitations of the framework and discuss how it might be further tested.

Clinician-led improvement in cancer care (CLICC)--testing a multifaceted implementation strategy to increase evidence-based prostate cancer care: phased randomised controlled trial--study protocol

BACKGROUND

Clinical practice guidelines have been widely developed and disseminated with the aim of improving healthcare processes and patient outcomes but the uptake of evidence-based practice remains haphazard. There is a need to develop effective implementation methods to achieve large-scale adoption of proven innovations and recommended care. Clinical networks are increasingly being viewed as a vehicle through which evidence-based care can be embedded into healthcare systems using a collegial approach to agree on and implement a range of strategies within hospitals. In Australia, the provision of evidence-based care for men with prostate cancer has been identified as a high priority. Clinical audits have shown that fewer than 10% of patients in New South Wales (NSW) Australia at high risk of recurrence after radical prostatectomy receive guideline recommended radiation treatment following surgery. This trial will test a clinical network-based intervention to improve uptake of guideline recommended care for men with high-risk prostate cancer.

METHODS/DESIGN

In Phase I, a phased randomised cluster trial will test a multifaceted intervention that harnesses the NSW Agency for Clinical Innovation (ACI) Urology Clinical Network to increase evidence-based care for men with high-risk prostate cancer following surgery. The intervention will be introduced in nine NSW hospitals over 10 months using a stepped wedge design. Outcome data (referral to radiation oncology for discussion of adjuvant radiotherapy in line with guideline recommended care or referral to a clinical trial of adjuvant versus salvage radiotherapy) will be collected through review of patient medical records. In Phase II, mixed methods will be used to identify mechanisms of provider and organisational change. Clinicians' knowledge and attitudes will be assessed through surveys. Process outcome measures will be assessed through document review. Semi-structured interviews will be conducted to elucidate mechanisms of change.

DISCUSSION

The study will be one of the first randomised controlled trials to test the effectiveness of clinical networks to lead changes in clinical practice in hospitals treating patients with high-risk cancer. It will additionally provide direction regarding implementation strategies that can be effectively employed to encourage widespread adoption of clinical practice guidelines.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ANZCTR): ACTRN12611001251910.

Improving the quality of care for older adults using evidence-informed clinical care pathways

Background

There has been an intensified focus on quality initiatives within health care. Clinical Networks have been established in Alberta as a structure to improve care within and across settings. One method used by Clinical Networks to improve care is clinical care pathways. The objective of this study was to evaluate an evidence-informed hip fracture acute care pathway before broad implementation.

Methods

The pathway was developed by a provincial Clinical Network and implemented at four of 14 hospitals across the province. Within four months of implementing the pathway, experienced interviewers conducted focus groups with end-users at the four sites. Domains of inquiry focused on indentifying barriers and facilitators to use of the pathway.

Results

Fifteen physicians and 29 other health-care providers participated in eight focus groups. Common themes identified around the pathway order sets included issues with format, workflow and workload, and dissemination. The patient/family educational materials were deemed to be beneficial. Health-care provider education required better support. Overall the pathway was seen to be comprehensive. However, communication about the pathway could have been improved.

Conclusions

This care model is novel in that it combines the concepts of clinical networks, care pathways, and knowledge translation in an effort to provide high-quality, evidence-informed care in a standardized equitable manner across a diverse geographic area.

British HIV Association national audit on the management of patients co-infected with tuberculosis and HIV

This audit aims to compare UK management of tuberculosis (TB)/HIV co-infection with recommended practice and to describe local care arrangements. Services providing HIV care were invited to complete a survey of care arrangements and to review case notes of HIV positive patients aged over 16 who started therapy for active TB between October 2007 and April 2008. Corresponding TB services, if separate, were invited to complete a similar survey. Responses were received from 124 of 170 HIV services, and 18 corresponding TB services. Data were obtained for 236 coinfected patients. Despite some incomplete data, this audit yielded useful findings. Many positive smear results were unacceptably delayed. The TB therapy completion rate fell short of the chief medical officer's (CMO's) 85% target. Culture confirmation of pulmonary TB met the CMO's 65% target. A high number of patients were diagnosed with HIV during investigation of TB. Contrary to current guidelines, many services do not routinely test TB patients for HIV.