Understanding how and why audits work in improving the quality of hospital care: A systematic realist review

被引:39
|
作者
Hut-Mossel, Lisanne [1 ]
Ahaus, Kees [2 ]
Welker, Gera [3 ]
Gans, Rijk [4 ]
机构
[1] Univ Groningen, Univ Med Ctr Groningen, Ctr Expertise Qual & Safety, Groningen, Netherlands
[2] Erasmus Univ, Erasmus Sch Hlth Policy & Management, Dept Hlth Serv Management & Org, Rotterdam, Netherlands
[3] Univ Groningen, Univ Med Ctr Groningen, Groningen, Netherlands
[4] Univ Groningen, Univ Med Ctr Groningen, Dept Internal Med, Groningen, Netherlands
来源
PLOS ONE | 2021年 / 16卷 / 03期
关键词
HEALTH-CARE; CLINICAL AUDIT; OPERATING-ROOM; FEEDBACK INTERVENTIONS; IMPROVEMENT PROJECT; MULTICENTER AUDIT; OF-CARE; ACCREDITATION; IMPLEMENTATION; SAFETY;
D O I
10.1371/journal.pone.0248677
中图分类号
O [数理科学和化学]; P [天文学、地球科学]; Q [生物科学]; N [自然科学总论];
学科分类号
07 ; 0710 ; 09 ;
摘要
Background Several types of audits have been used to promote quality improvement (QI) in hospital care. However, in-depth studies into the mechanisms responsible for the effectiveness of audits in a given context is scarce. We sought to understand the mechanisms and contextual factors that determine why audits might, or might not, lead to improved quality of hospital care. Methods A realist review was conducted to systematically search and synthesise the literature on audits. Data from individual papers were synthesised by coding, iteratively testing and supplementing initial programme theories, and refining these theories into a set of context-mechanism-outcome configurations (CMOcs). Results From our synthesis of 85 papers, seven CMOcs were identified that explain how audits work: (1) externally initiated audits create QI awareness although their impact on improvement diminishes over time; (2) a sense of urgency felt by healthcare professionals triggers engagement with an audit; (3) champions are vital for an audit to be perceived by healthcare professionals as worth the effort; (4) bottom-up initiated audits are more likely to bring about sustained change; (5) knowledge-sharing within externally mandated audits triggers participation by healthcare professionals; (6) audit data support healthcare professionals in raising issues in their dialogues with those in leadership positions; and (7) audits legitimise the provision of feedback to colleagues, which flattens the perceived hierarchy and encourages constructive collaboration. Conclusions This realist review has identified seven CMOcs that should be taken into account when seeking to optimise the design and usage of audits. These CMOcs can provide policy makers and practice leaders with an adequate conceptual grounding to design contextually sensitive audits in diverse settings and advance the audit research agenda for various contexts. PROSPERO registration CRD42016039882.
引用
收藏
页数:25
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [41] A Systematic Review of the Association Between Hospital Cost/price and the Quality of Care
    Jamalabadi, Sara
    Winter, Vera
    Schreyoegg, Jonas
    APPLIED HEALTH ECONOMICS AND HEALTH POLICY, 2020, 18 (05) : 625 - 639
  • [42] Quality of Care Indicators for Hospital Physical Therapy Units: A Systematic Review
    Angel-Garcia, Daniel
    Martinez-Nicolas, Ismael
    Salmeri, Bianca
    Monot, Alizee
    PHYSICAL THERAPY, 2022, 102 (02):
  • [43] How do community based dementia friendly initiatives work for people with dementia and their caregivers, and why? A rapid realist review
    Thijssen, Marjolein
    Daniels, Ramon
    Lexis, Monique
    Jansens, Rianne
    Peeters, Jose
    Chadborn, Neil
    Nijhuis-van der Sanden, Maria W. G.
    Kuijer-Siebelink, Wietske
    Graff, Maud
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF GERIATRIC PSYCHIATRY, 2022, 37 (02)
  • [44] Improving hospital-based end of life care processes and outcomes: a systematic review of research output, quality and effectiveness
    Waller, Amy
    Dodd, Natalie
    Tattersall, Martin H. N.
    Nair, Balakrishnan
    Sanson-Fisher, Rob
    BMC PALLIATIVE CARE, 2017, 16
  • [45] Improving hospital-based end of life care processes and outcomes: a systematic review of research output, quality and effectiveness
    Amy Waller
    Natalie Dodd
    Martin H. N. Tattersall
    Balakrishnan Nair
    Rob Sanson-Fisher
    BMC Palliative Care, 16
  • [46] Ethics on the work floor: Improving the quality of care by improving the quality of caregivers
    Reinders, H
    JOURNAL OF INTELLECTUAL DISABILITY RESEARCH, 2004, 48 : 497 - 497
  • [47] How, in what contexts, and why do quality dashboards lead to improvements in care quality in acute hospitals? Protocol for a realist feasibility evaluation
    Randell, Rebecca
    Alvarado, Natasha
    McVey, Lynn
    Greenhalgh, Joanne
    West, Robert M.
    Farrin, Amanda
    Gale, Chris
    Parslow, Roger
    Keen, Justin
    Elshehaly, Mai
    Ruddle, Roy A.
    Lake, Julia
    Mamas, Mamas
    Feltbower, Richard
    Dowding, Dawn
    BMJ OPEN, 2020, 10 (02):
  • [48] Upskilling programmes for unregulated care providers to provide diabetic foot screening for systematically marginalised populations: how, why and in what contexts do they work? A realist review
    Hassan, Samah
    Rac, Valeria E.
    Hodges, Brian
    Leake, Patti
    Cobbing, Saul
    Gray, Catharine Marie
    Bartley, Nicola
    Etherington, Andrea
    Abdulwasi, Munira
    Cheung, Hei-Ching Kristy
    Anderson, Melanie
    Woods, Nicole N.
    BMJ OPEN, 2024, 14 (01):
  • [49] Understanding why primary care doctors leave direct patient care: a systematic review of qualitative research
    Long, Linda
    Moore, Darren
    Robinson, Sophie
    Sansom, Anna
    Aylward, Alex
    Fletcher, Emily
    Welsman, Jo
    Dean, Sarah Gerard
    Campbell, John L.
    Anderson, Rob
    BMJ OPEN, 2020, 10 (05):
  • [50] Understanding how midwife-led continuity of care can be implemented and under what circumstances: a realist review
    Simmelink, Renate
    Neppelenbroek, Elise
    Pouwels, Anneke
    van der Lee, Nadine
    Pajkrt, Eva
    Ziesemer, Kirsten A.
    van der Vliet-Torij, Hanneke W. Harmsen
    Verhoeven, Corine J. M.
    de Jonge, Ank
    Nieuwenhuijze, Marianne
    BMJ OPEN, 2025, 15 (02):