Laboratory Medicine Best Practices: Systematic Evidence Review and Evaluation Methods for Quality Improvement

Author:

Christenson Robert H1,Snyder Susan R2,Shaw Colleen S2,Derzon James H3,Black Robert S3,Mass Diana4,Epner Paul5,Favoretto Alessandra M3,Liebow Edward B3

Affiliation:

1. University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD

2. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Laboratory Research and Evaluation Branch, Division of Laboratory Science and Standards, Office of Surveillance, Epidemiology, and Laboratory Services, Atlanta, GA

3. Battelle Centers for Public Health Research and Evaluation, North Seattle, WA

4. Arizona State University, School of Life Sciences, Clinical Laboratory Sciences, Tempe, AZ

5. Paul Epner LLC, 1501 Hinman Ave., Evanston, IL

Abstract

OBJECTIVE To develop methods for systematically reviewing evidence for identifying effective laboratory medicine (LM) practices associated with improved healthcare quality outcomes. RELEVANCE Although many evidence-evaluation systems have been developed, none are designed to include and rate healthcare quality improvement studies to identify evidence-based practices that improve patient safety and LM quality. METHODS Validated evidence-based medicine methods established by governmental agencies, the Guide to Community Preventive Services, and others were adapted for the LM field. Key methods modifications included (a) inclusion of quality improvement study designs; (b) mechanisms for inclusion of unpublished evidence, (c) combining of individual ratings of study quality, effect size, and relevance of outcome measures to evaluate consistency of practice evidence; and (d) deriving an overall strength rating to support evidence-based best practice recommendations. The methods follow the process steps of: ask; acquire; appraise; analyze; apply; and assess. Expert panels used the systematic evidence review results on practice effectiveness for improving healthcare quality outcomes consistent with the Institute of Medicine's healthcare quality aims (safe, timely, effective, equitable, efficient, and patient-centered). CONCLUSIONS Adapting and developing methods from validated systems and applying them to systematically review and evaluate practices in LM by using published and unpublished studies is feasible. With these methods, evidence from quality improvement studies can be systematically synthesized and summarized to identify effective LM practices. Practical and scientifically validated demonstration of a positive impact on outcomes ensures that practitioners, policy makers, and decision makers at all levels have the evidence needed for improving healthcare quality and public health.

Funder

CDC

Battelle Centers for Public Health Research and Evaluation

Publisher

Oxford University Press (OUP)

Subject

Biochemistry (medical),Clinical Biochemistry

Reference34 articles.

1. To err is human: building a safer health system;Institute of Medicine,2000

2. Crossing the quality chasm: a new health care system for the 21st century;Institute of Medicine,2001

3. Simmons J . Patient safety incidents showed little change in 2009 says HealthGrades. Healthleaders Media. http://www.healthleadersmedia.com/content/QUA-248824/Patient-Safety-Incidents-Showed-Little-Change-in-2009-Says-HealthGrades (Accessed July 2010).

4. Systems to rate the strength of scientific evidence;West,2002

5. The urgent need to improve health care quality: Institute of Medicine National Roundtable on Health Care Quality;Chassin;JAMA,1998

Cited by 57 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3