Quality improvement needed in quality improvement randomised trials: systematic review of interventions to improve care in diabetes

被引:13
|
作者
Ivers, Noah M. [1 ]
Tricco, Andrea C. [2 ]
Taljaard, Monica [3 ]
Halperin, Ilana [4 ]
Turner, Lucy [5 ]
Moher, David [5 ]
Grimshaw, Jeremy M. [5 ]
机构
[1] Univ Toronto, Dept Family & Community Med, Womens Coll Hosp, Toronto, ON M5S 1A1, Canada
[2] St Michaels Hosp, Li Ka Shing Knowledge Inst, Toronto, ON M5B 1W8, Canada
[3] Univ Ottawa, Dept Epidemiol & Community Med, Ottawa, ON, Canada
[4] Univ Toronto, Dept Med, Div Endocrinol & Metab, Toronto, ON M5S 1A1, Canada
[5] Ottawa Hosp Res Inst, Clin Epidemiol Program, Ottawa, ON, Canada
来源
BMJ OPEN | 2013年 / 3卷 / 04期
关键词
DIABETES & ENDOCRINOLOGY; STATISTICS & RESEARCH METHODS; CONSORT STATEMENT; IMPACT; RISK; BIAS; STRATEGIES; GUIDELINES; EXTENSION; BEHAVIOR; TOOL;
D O I
10.1136/bmjopen-2013-002727
中图分类号
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
Objective Despite the increasing numbers of published trials of quality improvement (QI) interventions in diabetes, little is known about the risk of bias in this literature. Design Secondary analysis of a systematic review. Data sources Medline, the Cochrane Effective Practice and Organisation of Care (EPOC) database (from inception to July 2010) and references of included studies. Eligibility criteria Randomised trials assessing 11 predefined QI strategies or financial incentives targeting health systems, healthcare professionals or patients to improve the management of adult outpatients with diabetes. Analysis Risk of bias (low, unclear or high) was assessed for the 142 trials in the review across nine domains using the EPOC version of the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool. We used Cochran-Armitage tests for trends to evaluate the improvement over time. Results There was no significant improvement over time in any of the risk of bias domains. Attrition bias (loss to follow-up) was the most common source of bias, with 24 trials (17%) having high risk of bias due to incomplete outcome data. Overall, 69 trials (49%) had at least one domain with high risk of bias. Inadequate reporting frequently hampered the risk of bias assessment: allocation sequence was unclear in 82 trials (58%) and allocation concealment was unclear in 78 trials (55%). There were significant reductions neither in the proportions of studies at high risk of bias over time nor in the adequacy of reporting of risk of bias domains. Conclusions Nearly half of the included QI trials in this review were judged to have high risk of bias. Such trials have serious limitations that put the findings in question and therefore inhibit evidence-based QI. There is a need to limit the potential for bias when conducting QI trials and improve the quality of reporting of QI trials so that stakeholders have adequate evidence for implementation.
引用
收藏
页数:9
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Improving Diabetes Care in Rural Areas: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Quality Improvement Interventions in OECD Countries
    Ricci-Cabello, Ignacio
    Ruiz-Perez, Isabel
    Rojas-Garcia, Antonio
    Pastor, Guadalupe
    Goncalves, Daniela C.
    PLOS ONE, 2013, 8 (12):
  • [22] INTERVENTIONS TO IMPROVE PRESCRIBING QUALITY IN CARE HOMES: A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW
    Loganathan, M.
    Singh, S.
    Bottle, Alex
    Franklin, B. D.
    Majeed, A.
    JOURNAL OF EPIDEMIOLOGY AND COMMUNITY HEALTH, 2010, 64 : A43 - A44
  • [23] A Multidisciplinary Quality Improvement Program to Improve Diabetes Care at a Free Clinic
    Hopper, Wade
    Ruane, Patrick
    DiMucci-Ward, JuliSu
    Ables, Adrienne Z.
    CUREUS JOURNAL OF MEDICAL SCIENCE, 2023, 15 (03)
  • [24] SYSTEMATIC REVIEW OF QUALITY-IMPROVEMENT INTERVENTIONS AIMED AT CANCER SPECIALISTS
    Coory, Michael
    White, Victoria
    Johnson, Kristin
    Hill, David J.
    Jefford, Michael
    Harrison, Simon
    Winship, Ingrid
    Millar, Jeremy
    Giles, Graham
    ASIA-PACIFIC JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ONCOLOGY, 2012, 8 : 348 - 348
  • [25] Patient experiences: a systematic review of quality improvement interventions in a hospital setting
    Bastemeijer, Carla M.
    Boosman, Hileen
    van Ewijk, Hans
    Verweij, Lisanne M.
    Voogt, Lennard
    Hazelzet, Jan A.
    PATIENT-RELATED OUTCOME MEASURES, 2019, 10 : 157 - 169
  • [26] Quality level of nursing work life and improvement interventions: Systematic review
    Viselita, Febrina
    Handiyani, Hanny
    Pujasari, Hening
    ENFERMERIA CLINICA, 2019, 29 : 223 - 228
  • [27] Quality improvement in pediatric intensive care: A systematic review of the literature
    Kourtis Susan A
    Burns Jeffrey P
    儿科学研究(英文), 2019, 3 (02) : 110 - 111-112-113-114-115-116
  • [28] Quality improvement in pediatric intensive care: A systematic review of the literature
    Kourtis, Susan A.
    Burns, Jeffrey P.
    PEDIATRIC INVESTIGATION, 2019, 3 (02) : 110 - 116
  • [29] THE ROLE OF THE PSYCHOSOCIAL DIMENSION IN THE IMPROVEMENT OF QUALITY OF CARE: A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW
    Makivic, Irena
    Kersnik, Janko
    Klemenc-Ketis, Zalika
    ZDRAVSTVENO VARSTVO, 2016, 55 (01): : 86 - 95
  • [30] Methods of Capturing Process Outcomes in Quality Improvement Trials: A Systematic Review
    Radisic, Gorjana
    de la Perrelle, Lenore
    Laver, Kate
    JOURNAL FOR HEALTHCARE QUALITY, 2022, 44 (03) : 131 - 151