Assessing the quality of reporting on quality improvement initiatives in plastic surgery: A systematic review

被引:0
|
作者
Pereira, D. Daniel [1 ,4 ]
Market, Marisa R. [2 ]
Bell, Stephanie A. [3 ]
Malic, Claudia C. [1 ,3 ]
机构
[1] Univ Ottawa, Div Plast & Reconstruct Surg, Ottawa, ON, Canada
[2] Univ Ottawa, Fac Med, Ottawa, ON, Canada
[3] Childrens Hosp Eastern Ontario, Dept Plast Surg, Ottawa, ON, Canada
[4] Univ Ottawa, Div Plast & Reconstruct Surg, Box 213-1053,Carling Ave, Ottawa, ON K1Y 4E9, Canada
关键词
Systematic review; Quality improvement; Plastic surgery; Research report; ENHANCED RECOVERY PATHWAY; SAME-DAY DISCHARGE; PUBLICATION GUIDELINES; BREAST RECONSTRUCTION; ERAS PROTOCOL; IMPLEMENTATION; PROGRAM; BURNS; MASTECTOMY; STANDARD;
D O I
10.1016/j.bjps.2023.01.036
中图分类号
R61 [外科手术学];
学科分类号
摘要
Background: There has been a recent increase in the number and complexity of quality improvement studies in plastic surgery. To assist with the development of thorough quality improvement reporting practices, with the goal of improving the transferability of these initiatives, we conducted a systematic review of studies describing the implementation of quality improvement initiatives in plastic surgery. We used the SQUIRE 2.0 (Standards for Quality Improvement Reporting Excellence) guideline to appraise the quality of reporting of these initiatives.Methods: English-language articles published in Embase, MEDLINE, CINAHL, and the Cochrane databases were searched. Quantitative studies evaluating the implementation of quality im- provement initiatives in plastic surgery were included. The primary endpoint of interest in this review was the distribution of studies per SQUIRE 2.0 criteria scores in proportions. Abstract screening, full-text screening, and data extraction were completed independently and in du- plicate by the review team.Results: We screened 7046 studies, of which 103 full texts were assessed, and 50 met inclusion criteria. In our assessment, only 7 studies (14%) met all 18 SQUIRE 2.0 criteria. SQUIRE 2.0 criteria that were met most frequently were abstract, problem description, rationale, and specific aims. The lowest SQUIRE 2.0 scores appeared in funding, conclusion, and interpretation criteria.Conclusions: Improvements in QI reporting in plastic surgery, especially in the realm of funding, costs, strategic trade-offs, project sustainability, and potential for spread to other contexts, will further advance the transferability of QI initiatives, which could lead to sig- nificant strides in improving patient care.(c) 2023 British Association of Plastic, Reconstructive and Aesthetic Surgeons. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:101 / 110
页数:10
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] The reporting quality of randomised controlled trials in plastic surgery
    Agha, R. A.
    Camm, C. F.
    Doganay, E.
    Edison, E.
    Siddiqui, M. R. S.
    Orgill, D. P.
    BRITISH JOURNAL OF SURGERY, 2013, 100 : 71 - 71
  • [32] Methodology and reporting quality of reporting guidelines: systematic review
    Xiaoqin Wang
    Yaolong Chen
    Nan Yang
    Wei Deng
    Qi Wang
    Nan Li
    Liang Yao
    Dang Wei
    Gen Chen
    Kehu Yang
    BMC Medical Research Methodology, 15
  • [33] How to Link Outcomes Data to Quality Initiatives in Plastic Surgery?
    Waljee, Jennifer F.
    Chung, Kevin C.
    CLINICS IN PLASTIC SURGERY, 2013, 40 (02) : 271 - +
  • [34] Impact of quality improvement initiatives to improve CKD referral patterns: a systematic review protocol
    Ghimire, Anukul
    Sultana, Naima
    Ye, Feng
    Hamonic, Laura N.
    Grill, Allan K.
    Singer, Alexander
    Akbari, Ayub
    Braam, Branko
    Collister, David
    Jindal, Kailash
    Courtney, Mark
    Shah, Nikhil
    Ronksley, Paul E.
    Shurraw, Sabin
    Brimble, Kenneth Scott
    Klarenbach, Scott
    Chou, Sophia
    Shojai, Soroush
    Deved, Vinay
    Wong, Andrew
    Okpechi, Ikechi
    Bello, A. K.
    BMJ OPEN, 2022, 12 (04):
  • [35] Quality Improvement Initiatives in Sonography Education: A Review of the Literature
    Sorrentino, Kimberly
    JOURNAL OF DIAGNOSTIC MEDICAL SONOGRAPHY, 2021, 37 (05) : 473 - 480
  • [36] Methodologic Quality of Systematic Reviews Published in the Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery Literature: A Systematic Review
    Samargandi, Osama A.
    Hasan, Haroon
    Thoma, Achilleas
    PLASTIC AND RECONSTRUCTIVE SURGERY, 2016, 137 (01) : 225E - 236E
  • [37] Quality of plastic surgery Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) studies: A systematic review
    Uhlman, Kathryn
    Behroozian, Tara
    Lewandowski, Natalia
    Yuan, Morgan
    Kim, Patrick
    Hatchell, Alexandra
    Voineskos, Sophocles
    Temple-Oberle, Claire
    Thoma, Achilles
    JOURNAL OF PLASTIC RECONSTRUCTIVE AND AESTHETIC SURGERY, 2025, 101 : 106 - 118
  • [38] Scoping Review of the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program in Plastic Surgery Research
    Augustine, Haley F. M.
    Hu, Jiayi
    Najarali, Zainab
    McRae, Matthew
    PLASTIC SURGERY, 2019, 27 (01) : 54 - 65
  • [39] Improving the quality of plastic surgery systematic reviews
    Freshwater, M. Felix
    JOURNAL OF PLASTIC RECONSTRUCTIVE AND AESTHETIC SURGERY, 2015, 68 (04): : 582 - 582
  • [40] Methodologic and Reporting Quality of Economic Evaluations in Hand and Wrist Surgery: A Systematic Review
    Uhlman, Kathryn
    Miroshnychenko, Anna
    Duku, Eric
    Xie, Feng
    Thoma, Achilles
    PLASTIC AND RECONSTRUCTIVE SURGERY, 2022, 149 (03) : 453E - 464E