Hospital on a Page: Standardizing Data Presentation to Drive Quality Improvement

Heenan, Michael; DiEmanuele, Michelle; Hayward-Murray, Kathryn; Dadgar, Ladan

doi:10.12927/hcq.2012.22767

Cited by 3 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…20 23 29 32-34 The tool itself was seen as highly effective as a mechanism of communication between team members/departments. 14 23 24 35 Leadership support in BSC efforts was believed to be key to successful efforts, [36][37][38][39] as was socialising the concept of the BSC to all involved as this was identified as a challenge in some settings. 20 40 41 Defining who was accountable for individual metrics or the BSC was also part of effective implementation strategies.…”

Section: Lessons Learned In Scorecard Developmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

Scoping review of balanced scorecards for use in healthcare settings: development and implementation

Bohm,

Lacaille,

Spencer

et al. 2021

BMJ Open Qual

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ObjectiveBalanced scorecards (BSCs) were developed in the early 1990s in corporate settings as a strategic performance management tool that emphasised measurement from multiple perspectives. Since their introduction, BSCs have been adapted for a variety of industries, including to healthcare settings. The aim of this scoping review was to describe the application of BSCs in healthcare.MethodsMedline, Embase and CINHAL databases were searched using keywords and medical subject headings for ‘balanced scorecard’ and related terms from 1992 to 17/04/2020. Title and abstract screening and full text review were conducted in duplicate by two reviewers. Studies describing the development and/or implementation of a BSC in a healthcare setting were included. Data were abstracted using pilot-tested forms and reviewed for key themes and findings.Results8129 records were identified and 841 underwent a full text review. 87 articles were included. Over 26 countries were represented and the majority of BSCs were applied at a local level (54%) in hospital settings (41%). While almost all discussed Kaplan and Norton’s original BSC (97%), only 69% described alignment with a strategic plan. Patients/family members were rarely involved in development teams (3%) which typically were comprised of senior healthcare leaders/administrators. Only 21% of BSCs included perspectives using identical formatting to the original BSC description. Lessons learnt during development addressed three main themes: scorecard design, stakeholder engagement and feasibility.ConclusionsBSC frameworks have been used in various healthcare settings but frequently undergo adaptation from the original description in order to suit a specific healthcare context. Future BSCs should aim to include patients/families to promote patient-centred healthcare systems. Considering the heterogeneity evident in development approaches, methodological guidance in this area is warranted.

show abstract

Section: Lessons Learned In Scorecard Developmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

Scoping review of balanced scorecards for use in healthcare settings: development and implementation

Bohm,

Lacaille,

Spencer

et al. 2021

BMJ Open Qual

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Whilst Ferlie and Shortell (2001) felt that a process checklist could not have the full attributes necessary to capture improvement dynamics, some authors, such as Luxford et al (2011), advocated accountability, leadership and patient/family engagement. Others, such as Haines et al (2004), Heenan et al (2012) and Harrison and Daly (2009), emphasised data and technology, suggesting a strong correlation between technology-enabled knowledge management and improvement. Kennedy et al (2011) suggested that data utilisation strengthens accountability, thus promoting certain values and behaviour.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Improvement attributes in healthcare: implications for integrated care

Harnett

2018

IJHCQA

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose Healthcare quality improvement is a key concern for policy makers, regulators, carers and service users. Despite a contemporary consensus among policy makers that integrated care represents a means to substantially improve service outcomes, progress has been slow. Difficulties achieving sustained improvement at scale imply that methods employed are not sufficient and that healthcare improvement attributes may be different when compared to prior reference domains. The purpose of this paper is to examine and synthesise key improvement attributes relevant to a complex healthcare change process, specifically integrated care. Design/methodology/approach This study is based on an integrative literature review on systemic improvement in healthcare. Findings A central theme emerging from the literature review indicates that implementing systemic change needs to address the relationship between vision, methods and participant social dynamics. Practical implications Accommodating personal and professional network dynamics is required for systemic improvement, especially among high autonomy individuals. This reinforces the need to recognise the change process as taking place in a complex adaptive system where personal/professional purpose/meaning is central to the process. Originality/value Shared personal/professional narratives are insufficiently recognised as a powerful change force, under-represented in linear and rational empirical improvement approaches.

show abstract

“…Even with recent policy push factors such as World Health Assembly resolutions calling for better support for rehabilitation, there are still many implementation challenges. These include a lack of recognized standards that are simple to implement and monitor [9], and might be used to drive reforms [10]. This has led to current efforts to develop global guidelines for health-related rehabilitation [11].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Compliance with standards of practice for health-related rehabilitation in low and middle-income settings: development and implementation of a novel scoring method

Pryor

Newar²,

Retis³

et al. 2018

Disability and Rehabilitation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose: To (A) develop a method for measuring compliance with standards, and (B) implementation of the method in 12 rehabilitation centers in six low and middle-income countries (LMICs). Methods: In part A, existing standards were compiled and operationalized into scores, organized into 5 'scorecards' and 15 'sub-scorecards', then tested and refined in an iterative process. In part B, 12 rehabilitation centers in 6 countries implemented the standards using the new method, revealing relative performance between centers, and across different standards. Internal consistency of scores within domains was computed using Chronbach's alpha. Results: A standardized method for scoring compliance with standards for rehabilitation was developed. The method evaluated compliance with standards in five domains of practice: user focused approach, service outputs, finances, staff, and general management. Multiple standards within domains were strongly related, with Chronbach's alpha >0.80 for all but the equipment and supplies domain. Overall, in the 12 rehabilitation centers examined, 36% of standards were met or exceeded. Compliance within each scoring domain was 56% (user-focused approach), 38% (service outputs), 27% (financial management), 30% (staff management), and 33% (general management). Two out of 12 (17%) of centers met more than two-thirds of the standards, 3 (25%) met more than one-third of standards, while the remaining 7 (58%) met less than one-third of standards. Conclusions: A new, standardized method for measuring performance of rehabilitation services in LMICs was developed. The method examines standards in five rehabilitation practice domains, and can be used to understand barriers to quality performance, particularly in resource-constrained settings. Implementation of the method demonstrated that current compliance with standards is modest. Ongoing interest in new standards for rehabilitation practice should be accompanied by measures to ensure they are used to strengthen quality in an emerging rehabilitation sector. ä IMPLICATIONS FOR REHABILITATION We developed a method for measuring compliance with standards for rehabilitation, and implemented the method in 12 rehabilitation centers in low and middle income countries. We demonstrate modest compliance with an adapted list of known standards of practice. New standards, scoring methods and evidence of current performance may assist service providers and policy makers to implement standards, and methods to strengthen rehabilitation services. Modest compliance with current standards suggest new emphasis on quality performance of healthrelated rehabilitation is needed New emphasis on standards for rehabilitation should be accompanied by consideration of how performance against those standards can be measured and improved.

show abstract

Hospital on a Page: Standardizing Data Presentation to Drive Quality Improvement

Cited by 3 publications

References 0 publications

Scoping review of balanced scorecards for use in healthcare settings: development and implementation

Scoping review of balanced scorecards for use in healthcare settings: development and implementation

Improvement attributes in healthcare: implications for integrated care

Compliance with standards of practice for health-related rehabilitation in low and middle-income settings: development and implementation of a novel scoring method

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About