Catalogue Search | MBRL
Search Results Heading
Explore the vast range of titles available.
MBRLSearchResults
-
DisciplineDiscipline
-
Is Peer ReviewedIs Peer Reviewed
-
Series TitleSeries Title
-
Reading LevelReading Level
-
YearFrom:-To:
-
More FiltersMore FiltersContent TypeItem TypeIs Full-Text AvailableSubjectPublisherSourceDonorLanguagePlace of PublicationContributorsLocation
Done
Filters
Reset
377,989
result(s) for
"Quality of care"
Sort by:
Researching quality in care transitions : international perspectives
\"This book is concerned with the complexities of achieving quality in care transitions. The organization and accomplishment of high quality care transitions relies upon the coordination of multiple professionals, working within and across multiple care processes, settings and organizations, each with their own distinct ways of working, profile of resources, and modes of organizing. In short, care transitions might easily be regarded as complex activities that take place within complex systems, which can make accomplishing high quality care challenging. As a subject of enquiry, care transitions are approached from many research, improvement and policy perspectives: from group psychology and human factors to social and political theory; from applied process re-engineering projects to exploratory ethnographic studies; from large-scale policy innovations to local improvements initiatives. This collection will provide a unique cross-disciplinary and multi-level analysis, where each chapter presents a particular depth of insight and analysis, and together offer a holistic and detail understand of care transitions.\"-- Provided by publisher.
When the patient is the expert: measuring patient experience and satisfaction with care
by
Bohren, Meghan A
,
Sharma, Jigyasa
,
Larson, Elysia
in
Accountability
,
Attention
,
Childbirth & labor
2019
In 2018, three independent reports were published, emphasizing the need for attention to, and improvements in, quality of care to achieve effective universal health coverage. A key aspect of high quality health care and health systems is that they are person-centred, a characteristic that is at the same time intrinsically important (all individuals have the right to be treated with dignity and respect) and instrumentally important (person-centred care is associated with improved health-care utilization and health outcomes). Following calls to make 2019 a year of action, we provide guidance to policy-makers, researchers and implementers on how they can take on the task of measuring person-centred care. Theoretically, measures of person-centred care allow quality improvement efforts to be evaluated and ensure that health systems are accountable to those they aim to serve. However, in practice, the utility of these measures is limited by lack of clarity and precision in designing and by using measures for different aspects of person-centeredness. We discuss the distinction between two broad categories of measures of patient-centred care: patient experience and patient satisfaction. We frame our discussion of these measures around three key questions: (i) how will the results of this measure be used?; (ii) how will patient subjectivity be accounted for?; and (iii) is this measure validated or tested? By addressing these issues during the design phase, researchers will increase the usability of their measures.
Journal Article
Long-term outcomes after critical illness: recent insights
by
Creteur, Jacques
,
Latronico, Nicola
,
Brett, Stephen J.
in
Anesthesia
,
Anesthesia & intensive care
,
Anesthésie & soins intensifs
2021
Intensive care survivors often experience post-intensive care sequelae, which are frequently gathered together under the term “post-intensive care syndrome” (PICS). The consequences of PICS on quality of life, health-related costs and hospital readmissions are real public health problems. In the present Viewpoint, we summarize current knowledge and gaps in our understanding of PICS and approaches to management.
Journal Article
Donabedian’s Lasting Framework for Health Care Quality
2016
In a landmark article published 50 years ago, Avedis Donabedian proposed using the triad of structure, process, and outcome to evaluate the quality of health care. That triad, along with his eventual seven pillars of quality, continues to inform efforts to improve care.
Though historians are often hesitant to declare any event a “first,” one might safely claim that the contemporary health care quality movement had its “founding moment” in October 1965. Less than 3 months after the Medicare and Medicaid programs were enacted, the newly created Health Services Research Section of the U.S. Public Health Service convened a meeting in Chicago of leaders from many health-related fields. These leaders considered the influence of social and economic research on public health, the organization of community health agencies, and the quality of health services.
One of these experts, Avedis Donabedian, a professor of medical . . .
Journal Article
The Model for Understanding Success in Quality (MUSIQ): building a theory of context in healthcare quality improvement
by
Kaplan, Heather C
,
Margolis, Peter A
,
Provost, Lloyd P
in
breakthrough groups
,
collaborative
,
context
2012
BackgroundQuality improvement (QI) efforts have become widespread in healthcare, however there is significant variability in their success. Differences in context are thought to be responsible for some of the variability seen.ObjectiveTo develop a conceptual model that can be used by organisations and QI researchers to understand and optimise contextual factors affecting the success of a QI project.Methods10 QI experts were provided with the results of a systematic literature review and then participated in two rounds of opinion gathering to identify and define important contextual factors. The experts subsequently met in person to identify relationships among factors and to begin to build the model.ResultsThe Model for Understanding Success in Quality (MUSIQ) is organised based on the level of the healthcare system and identifies 25 contextual factors likely to influence QI success. Contextual factors within microsystems and those related to the QI team are hypothesised to directly shape QI success, whereas factors within the organisation and external environment are believed to influence success indirectly.ConclusionsThe MUSIQ framework has the potential to guide the application of QI methods in healthcare and focus research. The specificity of MUSIQ and the explicit delineation of relationships among factors allows a deeper understanding of the mechanism of action by which context influences QI success. MUSIQ also provides a foundation to support further studies to test and refine the theory and advance the field of QI science.
Journal Article
The three numbers you need to know about healthcare: the 60-30-10 Challenge
by
Glasziou, Paul
,
Braithwaite, Jeffrey
,
Westbrook, Johanna
in
Adaptation
,
Artificial intelligence
,
Biobanks
2020
Background
Healthcare represents a paradox. While change is everywhere, performance has flatlined: 60% of care on average is in line with evidence- or consensus-based guidelines, 30% is some form of waste or of low value, and 10% is harm. The 60-30-10 Challenge has persisted for three decades.
Main body
Current top-down or chain-logic strategies to address this problem, based essentially on linear models of change and relying on policies, hierarchies, and standardisation, have proven insufficient. Instead, we need to marry ideas drawn from complexity science and continuous improvement with proposals for creating a deep learning health system. This dynamic learning model has the potential to assemble relevant information including patients’ histories, and clinical, patient, laboratory, and cost data for improved decision-making in real time, or close to real time. If we get it right, the learning health system will contribute to care being more evidence-based and less wasteful and harmful. It will need a purpose-designed digital backbone and infrastructure, apply artificial intelligence to support diagnosis and treatment options, harness genomic and other new data types, and create informed discussions of options between patients, families, and clinicians. While there will be many variants of the model, learning health systems will need to spread, and be encouraged to do so, principally through diffusion of innovation models and local adaptations.
Conclusion
Deep learning systems can enable us to better exploit expanding health datasets including traditional and newer forms of big and smaller-scale data, e.g. genomics and cost information, and incorporate patient preferences into decision-making. As we envisage it, a deep learning system will support healthcare’s desire to continually improve, and make gains on the 60-30-10 dimensions. All modern health systems are awash with data, but it is only recently that we have been able to bring this together, operationalised, and turned into useful information by which to make more intelligent, timely decisions than in the past.
Journal Article