Stakeholder Engagement to Identify Priorities for Improving the Quality and Value of Critical Care.
Large amounts of scientific evidence are generated, but not implemented into patient care (the 'knowledge-to-care' gap). We identified and prioritized knowledge-to-care gaps in critical care as opportunities to improve the quality and value of healthcare.We used a multi-method community-ba...
Main Authors: | , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Published: |
Public Library of Science (PLoS)
2015-01-01
|
Series: | PLoS ONE |
Online Access: | http://europepmc.org/articles/PMC4619641?pdf=render |
id |
doaj-4b2b42bc6e5546a3aa40ded8e45d590b |
---|---|
record_format |
Article |
spelling |
doaj-4b2b42bc6e5546a3aa40ded8e45d590b2020-11-25T01:41:53ZengPublic Library of Science (PLoS)PLoS ONE1932-62032015-01-011010e014014110.1371/journal.pone.0140141Stakeholder Engagement to Identify Priorities for Improving the Quality and Value of Critical Care.Henry T StelfoxDaniel J NivenFiona M ClementSean M BagshawDeborah J CookEmily McKenzieMelissa L PotestioChristopher J DoigBarbara O'NeillDavid ZygunCritical Care Strategic Clinical Network, Alberta Health ServicesLarge amounts of scientific evidence are generated, but not implemented into patient care (the 'knowledge-to-care' gap). We identified and prioritized knowledge-to-care gaps in critical care as opportunities to improve the quality and value of healthcare.We used a multi-method community-based participatory research approach to engage a Network of all adult (n = 14) and pediatric (n = 2) medical-surgical intensive care units (ICUs) in a fully integrated geographically defined healthcare system serving 4 million residents. Participants included Network oversight committee members (n = 38) and frontline providers (n = 1,790). Network committee members used a modified RAND/University of California Appropriateness Methodology, to serially propose, rate (validated 9 point scale) and revise potential knowledge-to-care gaps as priorities for improvement. The priorities were sent to frontline providers for evaluation. Results were relayed back to all frontline providers for feedback.Initially, 68 knowledge-to-care gaps were proposed, rated and revised by the committee (n = 32 participants) over 3 rounds of review and resulted in 13 proposed priorities for improvement. Then, 1,103 providers (62% response rate) evaluated the priorities, and rated 9 as 'necessary' (median score 7-9). Several factors were associated with rating priorities as necessary in multivariable logistic regression, related to the provider (experience, teaching status of ICU) and topic (strength of supporting evidence, potential to benefit the patient, potential to improve patient/family experience, potential to decrease costs).A community-based participatory research approach engaged a diverse group of stakeholders to identify 9 priorities for improving the quality and value of critical care. The approach was time and cost efficient and could serve as a model to prioritize areas for research quality improvement across other settings.http://europepmc.org/articles/PMC4619641?pdf=render |
collection |
DOAJ |
language |
English |
format |
Article |
sources |
DOAJ |
author |
Henry T Stelfox Daniel J Niven Fiona M Clement Sean M Bagshaw Deborah J Cook Emily McKenzie Melissa L Potestio Christopher J Doig Barbara O'Neill David Zygun Critical Care Strategic Clinical Network, Alberta Health Services |
spellingShingle |
Henry T Stelfox Daniel J Niven Fiona M Clement Sean M Bagshaw Deborah J Cook Emily McKenzie Melissa L Potestio Christopher J Doig Barbara O'Neill David Zygun Critical Care Strategic Clinical Network, Alberta Health Services Stakeholder Engagement to Identify Priorities for Improving the Quality and Value of Critical Care. PLoS ONE |
author_facet |
Henry T Stelfox Daniel J Niven Fiona M Clement Sean M Bagshaw Deborah J Cook Emily McKenzie Melissa L Potestio Christopher J Doig Barbara O'Neill David Zygun Critical Care Strategic Clinical Network, Alberta Health Services |
author_sort |
Henry T Stelfox |
title |
Stakeholder Engagement to Identify Priorities for Improving the Quality and Value of Critical Care. |
title_short |
Stakeholder Engagement to Identify Priorities for Improving the Quality and Value of Critical Care. |
title_full |
Stakeholder Engagement to Identify Priorities for Improving the Quality and Value of Critical Care. |
title_fullStr |
Stakeholder Engagement to Identify Priorities for Improving the Quality and Value of Critical Care. |
title_full_unstemmed |
Stakeholder Engagement to Identify Priorities for Improving the Quality and Value of Critical Care. |
title_sort |
stakeholder engagement to identify priorities for improving the quality and value of critical care. |
publisher |
Public Library of Science (PLoS) |
series |
PLoS ONE |
issn |
1932-6203 |
publishDate |
2015-01-01 |
description |
Large amounts of scientific evidence are generated, but not implemented into patient care (the 'knowledge-to-care' gap). We identified and prioritized knowledge-to-care gaps in critical care as opportunities to improve the quality and value of healthcare.We used a multi-method community-based participatory research approach to engage a Network of all adult (n = 14) and pediatric (n = 2) medical-surgical intensive care units (ICUs) in a fully integrated geographically defined healthcare system serving 4 million residents. Participants included Network oversight committee members (n = 38) and frontline providers (n = 1,790). Network committee members used a modified RAND/University of California Appropriateness Methodology, to serially propose, rate (validated 9 point scale) and revise potential knowledge-to-care gaps as priorities for improvement. The priorities were sent to frontline providers for evaluation. Results were relayed back to all frontline providers for feedback.Initially, 68 knowledge-to-care gaps were proposed, rated and revised by the committee (n = 32 participants) over 3 rounds of review and resulted in 13 proposed priorities for improvement. Then, 1,103 providers (62% response rate) evaluated the priorities, and rated 9 as 'necessary' (median score 7-9). Several factors were associated with rating priorities as necessary in multivariable logistic regression, related to the provider (experience, teaching status of ICU) and topic (strength of supporting evidence, potential to benefit the patient, potential to improve patient/family experience, potential to decrease costs).A community-based participatory research approach engaged a diverse group of stakeholders to identify 9 priorities for improving the quality and value of critical care. The approach was time and cost efficient and could serve as a model to prioritize areas for research quality improvement across other settings. |
url |
http://europepmc.org/articles/PMC4619641?pdf=render |
work_keys_str_mv |
AT henrytstelfox stakeholderengagementtoidentifyprioritiesforimprovingthequalityandvalueofcriticalcare AT danieljniven stakeholderengagementtoidentifyprioritiesforimprovingthequalityandvalueofcriticalcare AT fionamclement stakeholderengagementtoidentifyprioritiesforimprovingthequalityandvalueofcriticalcare AT seanmbagshaw stakeholderengagementtoidentifyprioritiesforimprovingthequalityandvalueofcriticalcare AT deborahjcook stakeholderengagementtoidentifyprioritiesforimprovingthequalityandvalueofcriticalcare AT emilymckenzie stakeholderengagementtoidentifyprioritiesforimprovingthequalityandvalueofcriticalcare AT melissalpotestio stakeholderengagementtoidentifyprioritiesforimprovingthequalityandvalueofcriticalcare AT christopherjdoig stakeholderengagementtoidentifyprioritiesforimprovingthequalityandvalueofcriticalcare AT barbaraoneill stakeholderengagementtoidentifyprioritiesforimprovingthequalityandvalueofcriticalcare AT davidzygun stakeholderengagementtoidentifyprioritiesforimprovingthequalityandvalueofcriticalcare AT criticalcarestrategicclinicalnetworkalbertahealthservices stakeholderengagementtoidentifyprioritiesforimprovingthequalityandvalueofcriticalcare |
_version_ |
1725039157455093760 |