Development of quality of care indicators from systematic reviews: the case of hospital delivery

Implementation Science

David Rigau⁵  Àngels Vives⁴  Carles Foradada¹  Dimelza Osorio²  Marta Beatriz Aller⁶  Marta Roqué³  Xavier Bonfill³ 

[1] Department of Gynaecology and Obstetrics, Corporació Sanitària Parc Taulí, Sabadell, Spain;Service of Clinical Epidemiology, Hospital de la Santa Creu i Sant Pau, Sant Pau Biomedical Research Institute (IIB Sant Pau), c/Sant Quintí 89, Barcelona, 08026, Spain;CIBERESP (CIBER de Epidemiología y Salud Pública), Barcelona, Spain;Department of Gynaecology and Obstetrics, Consorci Sanitari de Terrassa, Terrassa, Spain;Iberoamerican Cochrane Centre, Hospital de la Santa Creu i Sant Pau, Sant Pau Biomedical Research Institute (IIB Sant Pau), Barcelona, Spain;Research Unit. Consortium for Health Care and Social Services of Catalonia, Barcelona, Spain

关键词: Evaluation methodology;    Obstetrics and gynaecology;    Evidence-based medicine;    Healthcare;    Quality indicators;    Quality improvement methodologies;   

Others  :  813713
DOI  :  10.1186/1748-5908-8-42

 received in 2012-04-02, accepted in 2013-04-01,  发布年份 2013

【 摘 要 】

Background

The objective of this research is to generate quality of care indicators from systematic reviews to assess the appropriateness of obstetric care in hospitals.

Methods

A search for systematic reviews about hospital obstetric interventions, conducted in The Cochrane Library, clinical evidence and practice guidelines, identified 303 reviews. We selected 48 high-quality evidence reviews, which resulted in strong clinical recommendations using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system. The 255 remaining reviews were excluded, mainly due to a lack of strong evidence provided by the studies reviewed.

Results

A total of 18 indicators were formulated from these clinical recommendations, on antepartum care (8), care during delivery and postpartum (9), and incomplete miscarriage (1). Authors of the systematic reviews and specialists in obstetrics were consulted to refine the formulation of indicators.

Conclusions

High-quality systematic reviews, whose conclusions clearly claim in favour or against an intervention, can be a source for generating quality indicators of delivery care. To make indicators coherent, the nuances of clinical practice should be considered. Any attempt made to evaluate the extent to which delivery care in hospitals is based on scientific evidence should take the generated indicators into account.

【 授权许可】

   
2013 Bonfill et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

【 图 表 】

Figure 1.

【 参考文献 】

• [1]Institute of Medicine (IOM): Medicare: A Strategy for Quality Assurance, Volume I. Washington D.C; 1990.
• [2]Eddy DM: Variations in physician practice: the role of uncertainty. Health Aff (Millwood) 1984, 3:74-89.
• [3]Buen JM, Peiró S, Caldern SM: Variations in medical practice: importance, causes, and implications. Med Clin (Barc) 1998, 110:382-390.
• [4]Grol R, Grimshaw J: From best evidence to best practice: effective implementation of change in patients' care. Lancet 2003, 362:1225-1230.
• [5]Ellis J, Mulligan I, Rowe J: Inpatient general medicine is evidence based. A-Team, Nuffield Department of Clinical Medicine. Lancet 1995, 346:407-410.
• [6]Bare M, Jordana R, Toribio R: In-patient treatment decisions. Med Clin (Barc) 2004, 122:130-133.
• [7]Dubinsky M, Ferguson JH: Analysis of the National Institutes of Health Medicare coverage assessment. Int J Technol Assess Health Care 1990, 6:480-488.
• [8]Campbell SM, Braspenning J, Hutchinson A: Research methods used in developing and applying quality indicators in primary care. Qual Saf Health Care 2002, 11:358-364.
• [9]Brook RH, McGlynn EA, Cleary PD: Quality of health care. Part 2: measuring quality of care. N Engl J Med 1996, 335:966-970.
• [10]Wilson KC, Schünemann HJ: An Appraisal of the Evidence Underlying Performance Measures for Community-Acquired Pneumonia. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2011, 183:1454-1462.
• [11]McGlynn E, Kerr E, Damberg C: RAND Health. Quality of Care for Woman. A review of selected clinical conditions and quality indicators. Santa Monica, CA: RAND Corporation; 2000:431.
• [12]Glasziou P, Vandenbroucke JP, Chalmers I: Assessing the quality of research. BMJ 2004, 328:39-41.
• [13]Dodd JM, Crowther CA: Cochrane reviews in pregnancy: the role of perinatal randomized trials and systematic reviews in establishing evidence. Semin Fetal Neonatal Med 2006, 11:97-103.
• [14]Bailit JL: Measuring the quality of inpatient obstetrical care. Obstet Gynecol Surv 2007, 62:207-213.
• [15]SIGN 50: a guideline developer’s handbook. Edinburgh: Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network; 2008. Available from: http://www.sign.ac.uk/pdf/sign50.pdf webcite [Date accessed: July 2011]
• [16]GRADE Working Group: Grading quality of evidence and strength of recommendations. BMJ 2004, 328:1490.
• [17]Schunemann HJ, Jaeschke R, Cook DJ: An official ATS statement: grading the quality of evidence and strength of recommendations in ATS guidelines and recommendations. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2006, 174:605-614.
• [18]Kahn JM, Scales DC, Au DH: An official American Thoracic Society policy statement: pay-for-performance in pulmonary, critical care, and sleep medicine. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2010, 181:752-761.
• [19]Spertus JA, Eagle KA, Krumholz HM: American College of Cardiology and American Heart Association methodology for the selection and creation of performance measures for quantifying the quality of cardiovascular care. Circulation 2005, 111:1703-1712.
• [20]AHRQ Quality Indicators: Guide to Inpatient Quality Indicators: Quality of Care in Hospitals—Volume, Mortality, and Utilization. Rockville, MD: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality; 2002. Revision 4 (December 22, 2004). AHRQ Pub. No. .02-RO204. Available from: http://www.qualityindicators.ahrq.gov/Downloads/Software/SAS/V21R4/iqi_guide_rev4.pdf webcite [Date accessed: July 2011]
• [21]Lee A, Ngan Kee WD, Gin T: A quantitative, systematic review of randomized controlled trials of ephedrine versus phenylephrine for the management of hypotension during spinal anesthesia for cesarean delivery. Anesth Analg 2002, 94:920-926.
• [22]Duley L, Gulmezoglu AM: Magnesium sulphate versus lytic cocktail for eclampsia. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2010, (9):CD002960.
• [23]Duley L, Henderson-Smart D: agnesium sulphate versus diazepam for eclampsia. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2010, (12):CD000127.
• [24]Duley L, Henderson-Smart D: Magnesium sulphate versus phenytoin for eclampsia. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2010, (10):CD000128.
• [25]Roberts D, Dalziel S: Antenatal corticosteroids for accelerating fetal lung maturation for women at risk of preterm birth. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2006, (3):CD004454.
• [26]King JF, Flenady VJ, Papatsonis DN: Calcium channel blockers for inhibiting preterm labour. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2003, (1):CD002255.
• [27]Crowther CA, Hiller JE, Doyle LW: Magnesium sulphate for preventing preterm birth in threatened preterm labour. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2002, (4):CD001060.
• [28]Kenyon S, Boulvain M, Neilson J: Antibiotics for preterm premature rupture of membranes. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2010, (8):CD001058.
• [29]Gülmezoglu AM, Crowther CA, Middleton P, Heatley E: Induction of labour for improving birth outcomes for women at or beyond term. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2012, (6):CD004945. CD004945
• [30]Duley L, Gülmezoglu AM, Henderson-Smart DJ, Chou D: Magnesium sulphate and other anticonvulsants for women with pre-eclampsia. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2010, (11):CD000025.
• [31]Hofmeyr GJ, Kulier R: External cephalic version for breech presentation at term. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2012, (10):CD000083.
• [32]Hofmeyr GJ, Hannah ME: Planned caesarean section for term breech delivery. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2003, (2):CD000166.
• [33]Crowther CA, Alfirevic Z, Haslam RR: Thyrotropin-releasing hormone added to corticosteroids for women at risk of preterm birth for preventing neonatal respiratory disease. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2004, (2):CD000019.
• [34]Carroli G, Belizan J: Episiotomy for vaginal birth. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2009, (1):CD000081.
• [35]Kettle C, Johanson RB: Continuous versus interrupted sutures for perineal repair. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2007, (4):CD000947.
• [36]Reveiz L, Gaitán HG, Cuervo LG: Enemas during labour. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2007, (4):CD000330.
• [37]Basevi V, Lavender T: Routine perineal shaving on admission in labour. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2000, (4):CD001236. doi:10.1002/14651858.CD001236
• [38]Begley CM, Gyte GML, Murphy DJ: Active versus expectant management for women in the third stage of labour. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2010, (7):CD007412.
• [39]Smaill FM, Gyte GML: Antibiotic prophylaxis versus no prophylaxis for preventing infection after cesarean section. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2010, (1):CD007482.
• [40]Bamigboye AA, Hofmeyr GJ: Closure versus non-closure of the peritoneum at caesarean section. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2003, (4):CD000163.
• [41]Crowther C, Middleton P: Anti-D administration after childbirth for preventing Rhesus alloimmunisation. Cochrane Database Syst Rev (2):CD000021.
• [42]Tunçalp O, Gülmezoglu AM, Souza JP: Surgical procedures for evacuating incomplete miscarriage. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2010, (9):CD001993.
• [43]Tanner J, Parkinson H: Double gloving to reduce surgical cross-infection. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2006, 19(3):CD003087.
• [44]van den Boogaard E, Goddijn M, Leschot NJ: Development of guideline-based quality indicators for recurrent miscarriage. Reprod Biomed Online 2010, 20:267-273.
• [45]Radtke MA, Reich K, Blome C: Evaluation of quality of care and guideline-compliant treatment in psoriasis. Development of a new system of quality indicators. Dermatology 2009, 219:54-58.
• [46]Yazdany J, Panopalis P, Gillis JZ: A quality indicator set for systemic lupus erythematosus. Arthritis Rheum 2009, 61:370-377.
• [47]Terrell KM, Hustey FM, Hwang U: Quality indicators for geriatric emergency care. Acad Emerg Med 2009, 16:441-449.
• [48]Ko DT, Wijeysundera HC, Zhu X: National expert panel. Canadian quality indicators for percutaneous coronary interventions. Can J Cardiol 2008, 24:899-903.
• [49]Peiro S, Garcia-Altes A: Possibilities and limitations of results-based management, pay-for-performance and the redesign of incentives. 2008 SESPAS Report. Gac Sanit 2008, 22(Suppl1):143-155.
• [50]Walter LC, Davidowitz NP, Heineken PA: Pitfalls of converting practice guidelines into quality measures: lessons learned from a VA performance measure. JAMA 2004, 291:2466-2470.
• [51]Lichiello P, Turnock BJ: pub. Seattle, WA: Turning Point National Program Office, University of Washington; 1991. Available from: http://www.turningpointprogram.org/Pages/pdfs/perform_manage/pmc_guide.pdf webcite [Date accessed: July 2011]