Exploring the actionability of healthcare performance indicators for quality of care: a qualitative analysis of the literature, expert opinion and user experience

Author:

Barbazza EricaORCID,Klazinga Niek SORCID,Kringos Dionne SORCID

Abstract

BackgroundThis study explores the meaning of actionable healthcare performance indicators for quality of care-related decisions. To do so, we analyse the constructs of fitness for purpose and fitness for use across healthcare systems and in practice based on the literature, expert opinion and user experience.MethodsA multiphase qualitative study was undertaken. Phases included a literature review, a first round of one-on-one interviews with a panel of academics and thought leaders in the field (n=16), and a second round of interviews with real-world users of performance indicators (n=16). Thematic analysis was conducted between phases in order to triangulate findings in a stepwise process.ResultsCommon uses of healthcare performance indicators were differentiated within micro-meso-macro contexts of healthcare systems. Each purpose of use signals different decision-making tasks, and in effect information needs. An indicator’s fitness for use can be appraised by three clusters of considerations: methodological, contextual and managerial. Methodological considerations gauge an indicator’s perceived importance, engagement potential, interpretability, standardisation, feasibility of remedial actions, alignment to care models and sensitivity to change. Information infrastructure, system governance, workforce capacity and learning culture were found as enabling contextual considerations. Managerial considerations influencing an indicator’s use in practice were found to span the selection of indicators, data collection, analysis, display of results and delivery of information to decision-makers.ConclusionThe actionability of a healthcare performance indicator should be appraised by its alignment with the intended purpose of use beyond aggregate healthcare system levels, in combination with the extent to which methodological, contextual and managerial fitness for use considerations are met. Striking a better balance between the importance weighted to an indicator’s statistical merits and emphasis put to its fitness for purpose and use is needed for indicators that are ultimately actionable for quality of care-related decision-making.

Funder

H2020 Marie Skłodowska-Curie Actions

Publisher

BMJ

Subject

Health Policy

Reference79 articles.

1. Smith P . Part 1: Principles of performance measurement. In: Performance measurement for health system improvement: experiences, challenges and prospects. Copenahgen: WHO Regional Office for Europe, 2008.

2. WHO Regional Office for Europe . The Tallinn charter: health systems for health and wealth. Copenhagen: WHO Regional Office for Europe, 2008.

3. Fekri O , Macarayan ER , Klazinga N . Health system performance assessment in the WHO European Region: which domains and indicators have been used by Member States for its measurement? In: Health evidence network synthesis report 55. Copenhagen: WHO Regional Office for Europe, 2018.

4. World Health Organization . The world health report 2000: health systems: improving performance. Geneva: World Health Organization, 2000.

5. Kelley J , Hurst J . Health care quality indicators project conceptual framework paper, in OECD health working papers No. 23. Paris: OECD, 2006.

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