Explore the vast range of titles available.

Background Implementation Science (IS) frameworks facilitate definition of core and optional components of innovations, interventions and programmes, which increases the likelihood of successful implementation and sustainment. We used IS frameworks to characterise a hospital-based interdisciplinary quality improvement learning collaborative (QILC) which was established to develop quality improvement (QI) capability among front-line staff. The aim was to identify factors that supported implementation, potential threats to sustainability and elements that may influence dissemination into other settings. Methods Of five IS frameworks evaluated, two were selected, the Active Implementation Framework (action-oriented, dependent on feedback loops and improvement cycles) and the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (enabled definition of core components). The QILC was mapped against the drivers and constructs of each. Results Factors relating to the QILC’s leadership; the generation of tension for change; and the use of both internal and external networks were central features in implementation. Key drivers included the characteristics of front-line ownership, iterative development and tribality of the QILC, each being central to QI methodology. Risks to sustainability included patchy implementation, a requirement for greater alignment with organisational priorities, requirement for coaching and recruitment of additional leaders to support succession planning. Conclusions IS provided frameworks for retrospective analysis of a QI learning collaborative and identified factors that threaten sustainability. This analysis should help guide formative evaluations of similar QI learning collaboratives and offer an organisational framework to facilitate successful replication within different parts of an organisation and across multiple settings.

Background Quality improvement is a continuous process, and quality improvement collaboratives are frequently used worldwide to promote quality improvement. A Quality Improvement Model is recommended for performing quality improvement work systematically to ensure both quality and patient safety in healthcare services. The aim of this study was to gain a deeper understanding of municipal healthcare service employees’ use of the enhanced first phase of the Quality Improvement Model and to explore their experiences of participation in digital quality improvement collaboratives. Methods A qualitative design with focus group interviews was used. A semistructured interview guide was developed by the authors prior to the focus group interviews with the goal of obtaining relevant data for this study. Reflexive thematic analysis was used to analyse the focus group interviews. Results Three themes were revealed by the analysis: learning in community with others in a digital quality improvement collaborative; it is important to use the Quality Improvement Model properly; and the establishment of a culture that is conducive to quality improvement work is important. These themes highlight the necessity of ensuring that both managers and employees are familiar with the Quality Improvement Model used in quality improvement projects and understanding the importance of dedicating sufficient time to the preparation phase. Digital quality improvement collaboratives sessions and interim process guidance were key to sustaining momentum and driving progress in the quality improvement work. Conclusion The Quality Improvement Model is suitable for quality improvement work; furthermore, by using the model, participants were able to remain in the preparation phase longer, thereby refining their quality improvement work and making the project more robust. The digital quality improvement collaborative sessions and the process guidance provided between the sessions were important with respect to the progress of quality improvement work. Leadership anchoring and involvement are essential with respect to efforts to encourage employees to participate in quality improvement work and implement the changes required by such work.

Background An interrupted time series design is a powerful quasi-experimental approach for evaluating effects of interventions introduced at a specific point in time. To utilize the strength of this design, a modification to standard regression analysis, such as segmented regression, is required. In segmented regression analysis, the change in intercept and/or slope from pre- to post-intervention is estimated and used to test causal hypotheses about the intervention. We illustrate segmented regression using data from a previously published study that evaluated the effectiveness of a collaborative intervention to improve quality in pre-hospital ambulance care for acute myocardial infarction (AMI) and stroke. In the original analysis, a standard regression model was used with time as a continuous variable. We contrast the results from this standard regression analysis with those from segmented regression analysis. We discuss the limitations of the former and advantages of the latter, as well as the challenges of using segmented regression in analysing complex quality improvement interventions. Findings Based on the estimated change in intercept and slope from pre- to post-intervention using segmented regression, we found insufficient evidence of a statistically significant effect on quality of care for stroke, although potential clinically important effects for AMI cannot be ruled out. Conclusions Segmented regression analysis is the recommended approach for analysing data from an interrupted time series study. Several modifications to the basic segmented regression analysis approach are available to deal with challenges arising in the evaluation of complex quality improvement interventions.

Management of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) remains a challenge in primary care and multiple barriers can limit implementation of COPD guidelines. Since 2016, a quality improvement (QI) collaborative, called COMPAS+, has been implemented across the province of Quebec (Canada) to support improvement of chronic disease management in primary care. The aim of this study was to describe the main COPD quality problems reported by participating teams and the strategies they proposed and implemented to improve COPD primary care services in Quebec. Sixteen sites in four different regions of Quebec were engaged in the COMPAS+ intervention to improve primary care services delivered to people living with COPD. A total of 14 workshop reports, 31 QI action plans and 4 regional final reports underwent content analysis. Key COPD quality problems were first identified and, for each of them, root causes were classified according to the domains and constructs of the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research. Proposed strategies were organized according to the intervention function types described in the Behavior Change Wheel. Four key COPD quality problems were identified: 1) lack of organization/coordination of COPD services, 2) lack of screening services coordination, 3) lack of interprofessional communication and collaboration and 4) lack of treatment adherence. Main root causes explaining these quality gaps were 1) lack of awareness of COPD, 2) lack of professional knowledge, 3) lack of definition of professional roles, 4) lack of resources and tools for COPD prevention, diagnosis, and follow-up, 5) lack of communication tools, 6) lack of integration of the patient-as-partner approach, and 7) lack of adaptation of patient education to their specific needs. Multiple strategies were proposed to improve healthcare professionals' education and interprofessional collaboration and communication. QI collaborative activities can support achieving understanding of QI challenges healthcare organizations face to improve COPD services.

Background To successfully reduce the negative impacts of stroke, high-quality health and care practices are needed across the entire stroke care pathway. These practices are not always shared across organisations. Quality improvement collaboratives (QICs) offer a unique opportunity for key stakeholders from different organisations to share, learn and ‘take home’ best practice examples, to support local improvement efforts. This systematic review assessed the effectiveness of QICs in improving stroke care and explored the facilitators and barriers to implementing this approach. Methods Five electronic databases (MEDLINE, CINAHL, EMBASE, PsycINFO, and Cochrane Library) were searched up to June 2020, and reference lists of included studies and relevant reviews were screened. Studies conducted in an adult stroke care setting, which involved multi-professional stroke teams participating in a QIC, were included. Data was extracted by one reviewer and checked by a second. For overall effectiveness, a vote-counting method was used. Data regarding facilitators and barriers was extracted and mapped to the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR). Results Twenty papers describing twelve QICs used in stroke care were included. QICs varied in their setting, part of the stroke care pathway, and their improvement focus. QIC participation was associated with improvements in clinical processes, but improvements in patient and other outcomes were limited. Key facilitators were inter- and intra-organisational networking, feedback mechanisms, leadership engagement, and access to best practice examples. Key barriers were structural changes during the QIC’s active period, lack of organisational support or prioritisation of QIC activities, and insufficient time and resources to participate in QIC activities. Patient and carer involvement, and health inequalities, were rarely considered. Conclusions QICs are associated with improving clinical processes in stroke care; however, their short-term nature means uncertainty remains as to whether they benefit patient outcomes. Evidence around using a QIC to achieve system-level change in stroke is equivocal. QIC implementation can be influenced by individual and organisational level factors, and future efforts to improve stroke care using a QIC should be informed by the facilitators and barriers identified. Future research is needed to explore the sustainability of improvements when QIC support is withdrawn. Trial registration Protocol registered on PROSPERO ( CRD42020193966 ).

Optimising short- and long-term outcomes for children and patients with CHD depends on continued scientific discovery and translation to clinical improvements in a coordinated effort by multiple stakeholders. Several challenges remain for clinicians, researchers, administrators, patients, and families seeking continuous scientific and clinical advancements in the field. We describe a new integrated research and improvement network – Cardiac Networks United – that seeks to build upon the experience and success achieved to-date to create a new infrastructure for research and quality improvement that will serve the needs of the paediatric and congenital heart community in the future. Existing gaps in data integration and barriers to improvement are described, along with the mission and vision, organisational structure, and early objectives of Cardiac Networks United. Finally, representatives of key stakeholder groups – heart centre executives, research leaders, learning health system experts, and parent advocates – offer their perspectives on the need for this new collaborative effort.

The Breakthrough Series Quality Improvement Collaborative (QIC) initiative is a well-developed and widely used approach, but most of what we know about it has come from healthcare settings. In this article, those leading QICs to improve care in care homes provide detailed accounts of six QICs and share their learning of applying the QIC approach in the care home sector. Overall, five care home-specific lessons were learnt: (i) plan for the resources needed to support collaborative teams with collecting, processing, and interpreting data; (ii) create encouraging and safe working environments to help collaborative team members feel valued; (iii) recruit collaborative teams, QIC leads, and facilitators who have established relationships with care homes; (iv) regularly check project ideas are aligned with team members’ job roles, responsibilities, and priorities; and (v) work flexibly and accept that planned activities may need adapting as the project progresses. These insights are targeted at teams delivering QICs in care homes. These insights demonstrate the need to consider the care home context when applying improvement tools and techniques in this setting.

Background Immigrant women’s challenges in realizing sexual and reproductive health and rights (SRHR) are exacerbated by the lack of knowledge regarding how to tailor post-partum contraceptive services to their needs. Therefore, the overall aim of the IMPROVE-it project is to promote equity in SRHR through improvement of contraceptive services with and for immigrant women, and, thus, to strengthen women’s possibility to choose and initiate effective contraceptive methods post-partum. Methods This Quality Improvement Collaborative (QIC) on contraceptive services and use will combine a cluster randomized controlled trial (cRCT) with a process evaluation. The cRCT will be conducted at 28 maternal health clinics (MHCs) in Sweden, that are the clusters and unit of randomization, and include women attending regular post-partum visits within 16 weeks post birth. Utilizing the Breakthrough Series Collaborative model, the study’s intervention strategies include learning sessions, action periods, and workshops informed by joint learning, co-design, and evidence-based practices. The primary outcome, women’s choice of an effective contraceptive method within 16 weeks after giving birth, will be measured using the Swedish Pregnancy Register (SPR). Secondary outcomes regarding women’s experiences of contraceptive counselling, use and satisfaction of chosen contraceptive method will be evaluated using questionnaires completed by participating women at enrolment, 6 and 12 months post enrolment. The outcomes including readiness, motivation, competence and confidence will be measured through project documentation and questionnaires. The project’s primary outcome involving women’s choice of contraceptive method will be estimated by using a logistic regression analysis. A multivariate analysis will be performed to control for age, sociodemographic characteristics, and reproductive history. The process evaluation will be conducted using recordings from learning sessions, questionnaires aimed at participating midwives, intervention checklists and project documents. Discussion The intervention’s co-design activities will meaningfully include immigrants in implementation research and allow midwives to have a direct, immediate impact on improving patient care. This study will also provide evidence as to what extent, how and why the QIC was effective in post-partum contraceptive services. Trial registration NCT05521646, August 30, 2022.

The protracted form of COVID-19 known as ‘long covid’ was first described in 2020. Its symptoms, course and prognosis vary widely; some patients have a multi-system, disabling and prolonged illness. In 2021, ring-fenced funding was provided to establish 90 long covid clinics in England; some clinics were also established in Scotland and Wales. The NIHR-funded LOCOMOTION project implemented a UK-wide quality improvement collaborative involving ten of these clinics, which ran from 2021 to 2023. At regular online meetings held approximately 8-weekly, participants prioritised topics, discussed research evidence and guidelines, and presented exemplar case histories and clinic audits. A patient advisory group also held a priority-setting exercise, participated in quality meetings and undertook a service evaluation audit. The goal of successive quality improvement cycles aimed at changing practice to align with evidence was sometimes hard to achieve because definitive evidence did not yet exist in this new condition; many patients had comorbidities; and clinics were practically constrained in various ways. Nevertheless, much progress was made and a series of ‘best practice’ guides was produced, covering general assessment and management; breathing difficulties; orthostatic tachycardia and other autonomic symptoms; fatigue and cognitive impairment; and vocational rehabilitation. This paper summarises key findings with the frontline clinician in mind.