Evaluating a quality improvement collaborative: a hybrid approach

Purpose Quality improvement collaboratives (QICs) are a popular approach to improving healthcare services and patient outcomes. This paper evaluates a QIC implemented by a large, integrated healthcare organisation in Wales in the UK. Design/methodology/approach This evaluation study draws on two well-established evaluation frameworks: Kirkpatrick's approach to gather data on participant satisfaction and learning and Stake's approach to gather data and form judgements about the impact of the intervention. A mixed methods approach was taken which included documentary analysis, surveys, semi-structured interviews, and observation of the QIC programme. Findings Together the two frameworks provide a rounded interpretation of the extent to which the QIC intervention was fit-for-purpose. Broadly the evaluation of the QIC was positive with some areas of improvement identified. Research limitations/implications This study is limited to a QIC conducted within one organisation. Further testing of the hybrid framework is needed that extends to different designs of QICs. Practical implications A hybrid framework is provided to assist those charged with designing and evaluating QICs. Originality/value Evaluation studies are limited on QICs and if present tend to adopt one framework. Given the complexities of undertaking quality improvement within healthcare, this study uniquely takes a hybrid approach.