Closing the loop: a 10-year experience with routine outcome measurements to improve treatment in hand surgery

Abstract

Routine outcome measurements as a critical prerequisite of value-based healthcare have received considerable attention recently. There has been less attention for the last step in value-based healthcare where measurement of outcomes also leads to improvement in the quality of care. This is probably not without reason, since the last part of the learning cycle: ‘Closing the loop’, seems the hardest to implement. The journey from measuring outcomes to changing daily care can be troublesome. As early adopters of value-based healthcare, we would like to share our 10 years of experience in this journey. Examples of feedback loops are shown based on outcome measurements implemented to improve our daily care process as a focused hand surgery and hand therapy clinic. Feedback loops can be used to improve shared decision making, to monitor or predict treatment progression over time, for extreme value detection, improve journal clubs, and surgeon evaluation. Our goal as surgeons to improve treatment should not stop at the act of implementing routine outcome measurements. We should implement routine analysis and routine feedback loops, because real-time performance feedback can accelerate our learning cycle. Cite this article: EFORT Open Rev 2021;6:439-450. DOI: 10.1302/2058-5241.6.210012

Factors associated with self-reported pain and hand function following dorsal wrist ganglion excision

“…During this collaboration, a research team from the Hand-Wrist Study Group educated participants of the SUpExOr Study Group Studyathon on the strengths and weaknesses of big healthcare datasets using routinely collected data from the Hand Wrist Study Cohort. The cohort and data collection (Selles et al., 2020) and their use in daily clinical care (Feitz et al., 2021) have been described previously. The local medical research ethics committee approved the study.…”

Long-term outcomes after ulna shortening osteotomy: a mean follow-up of six years

“…Comprehensive details about the research setup, patient assessment, and follow-up regiment of the Hand and Wrist Cohort have been described previously. 17,18 Participant selection. We identified 126 patients with a treatment code of USO in the Hand and Wrist cohort between July 2011 and February 2017 (minimally four years before initiating this study).…”

“…Comprehensive details about the research setup, patient assessment, and follow-up regiment of the Hand and Wrist Cohort have been described previously. 17 , 18 …”

Prestatiemanagement bij Waardegedreven zorg: hoe verder?

“…De meeste papers richten zich op overeenkomsten en verschillen tussen kosten en uitkomsten van zorg voor en na de invoering van WGZ. Het is dan ook niet verrassend dat er meer kwantitatieve (Parra et al 2017;Robinson et al 2018;Winegar et al 2019;Reilly et al 2020;Van den Berg et al 2020;Feitz et al 2021;Van der Nat et al 2021) dan kwalitatieve (Bonde et al 2018;Nycz et al 2020;Zipfel et al 2020;Cote-Boileau et al 2021) studies zijn te vinden. De kwantitatieve studies richten zich, zoals aangegeven, vooral op de uitkomsten en specifieke inrichting van (instrumenten en meetsystemen die kunnen worden gebruikt rond) WGZ, en maken veelal gebruik van ziekenhuisdata of vragenlijsten.…”