Generic health relevance (organisation and delivery of services) Not Applicable Generic health relevance (organisation and delivery of services)
Conditions
Interventions
The project is based on MRC guidance for the design and evaluation of complex interventions. To ensure that QualDash has a robust theoretical basis and to enhance the probability of its widespread imp
Sponsors
University of Leeds
Eligibility
Sex/Gender
All
Inclusion criteria
Inclusion criteria: Staff who work in the participating NHS Trusts and relevant commissioners. Within the each Trust, we will recruit members of relevant clinical teams (cardiology, paediatric intensive care), the quality sub-committee, and Trust boards.
Exclusion criteria
Exclusion criteria: Participants who do not fulfil the inclusion criteria.
Design outcomes
Primary
| Measure | Time frame |
|---|---|
| 1. For MINAP, the primary outcome is the composite process measure Cumulative Missed Opportunities for Care (CMOC), which has nine components (pre-hospital ECG, acute use of aspirin, timely perfusion, prescription at hospital discharge of aspirin, thienopyridine inhibitor, ACE-inhibitor, HMG-CoA reductase inhibitor, beta blocker, referral for cardiac rehabilitation). This will be calculated using monthly audit data obtained from MINAP for 24 months pre-intervention and 12 months post-intervention. 2. For PICANet, the primary outcome is the use of non-invasive ventilation first for patients requiring ventilation. Monthly data will be obtained from PICANet for 24 months pre-intervention and 12 months post-intervention. | — |
Secondary
| Measure | Time frame |
|---|---|
| 1. Data completeness for MINAP and PICANet is measured using monthly data obtained from MINAP and PICANet for 24 months pre-intervention and 12 months post-intervention 2. Additional secondary outcomes to be included in the CITS will be determined on the basis of findings from Phase 1 regarding interviewees’ perceptions of the value of particular measures and the extent to which they can be impacted by quality improvement initiatives and through consultation with our Lay Advisory Group. 3. Percentage of intended users who use QualDash, with data collected from log files over the 12 month period of the evaluation, complemented by qualitative data collected through observations to understand how and in what contexts QualDash is used at 12 months 4. Perceived usefulness of QualDash and intention to continue using it after the study period is assessed using data collected through a questionnaire based on the Technology Acceptance Model, complemented by qualitative data collected through semi-structured interviews at 12 months | — |
Countries
England, United Kingdom
Outcome results
None listed