Management Systems, Public Health, Quality Improvement
Conditions
Brief summary
The investigators need stronger feedback loops and a quality monitoring and management system to improve the quality of care in sustainable way. The Chair Sint-Trudo To a sustainable quality policy was established to scientifically develop prerequisites for a sustainable quality of care. In this study protocol, a monocentric mixed-method quasi-experimental study will be used to assess the impact of a rapid-cycle quality indicator feedback mechanism on both patients and professionals.
Interventions
OTHERImplementation of a quality indicator feedback mechanism
1. Audit and feedback: A summary of clinical performance and hospital safety culture over a specified period of time. 2. Benchmarking Achievable: benchmarks are calculated from the performance of all members of a peer group and represents a realistic standard of excellence attained by the top performers in that group (i.e. comparing to the top 10% of peers). 3. Educational outreach: A trained independent person or investigator will meet with health professionals or managers in their practice setting to provide information (e.g. feedback of quality indicators). 4. Action planning: The purpose of action planning is to support quality improvement efforts by identifying opportunities for improvement, strategies and steps to accomplish the work.
Sponsors
Sint-Trudo Hospital
KU Leuven
Study design
Allocation
NA
Intervention model
SINGLE_GROUP
Primary purpose
HEALTH_SERVICES_RESEARCH
Masking
NONE
Eligibility
Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
18 Years to No maximum
Healthy volunteers
No
Inclusion criteria
* Patients admitted in the hospital for more than one night
Exclusion criteria
* Patients admitted in the hospital for less than one night
Design outcomes
Primary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Hospital mortality | During admission | In-hospital mortality rate |
| Patient experiences | During admission | Experiences of patients will be measures by a validated questionnaire (Flemisch Patient Experience Questionnaire). Q: Will you recommend our hospital? (scale min 0 until 10 with 0: not and 10: for sure). For follow questions the scores are 'disagree', 'somewhat agree', 'largely agree', 'totally agree. The higher the score the better the outcome Q: This information was provided by my GP or by healthcare providers in the hospital. Q: I understand the information I received about the cost of my stay. Q: I received sufficient information about the causes of my condition or about the possible treatment methods for my condition or about the consequences of my disease. Q: Nurses or doctors explained things in a way I could understand or treated me with courtesy and respect. Q: My privacy was respected during conversations with caregivers or during examinations, treatment and care. Q: Before any treatment my identity was checked. Q: Hospital staff always introduced themselves |
| In-hospital length of stay | During admission | Length of stay of each patient in the hospital |
| Adverse events and adverse outcomes | During admission | Each adverse event and following adverse outcomes will be measured: urinary tract infections, pressure ulcers, hospital-acquired pneumonia, shock/cardiac arrest, upper-gastrointestinal bleeding, hospital-acquired sepsis, deep venous thrombosis, central nervous system complications, surgical wound infection, pulmonary failure, metabolic derangement, methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus, vancomycin resistant Enterococcus, central line associated bloodstream infections, carbapenemase producing Enterobacteriaceae |
| Failure to rescue rate | During admission | The failure to rescue rate for each patient admitted in the hospital will be evaluated |
| Readmission rate | 30 days after discharge | Readmission within 30 days of each patient admitted in the hospital |
Countries
Belgium
Outcome results
None listed