Literature DB >> 11242721

Comparison of an enhanced versus a written feedback model on the management of Medicare inpatients with venous thrombosis.

R Hayes1, D Bratzler, B Armour, L Moore, C Murray, B R Stevens, M Radford, D Fitzgerald, K Elward, D J Ballard.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: A multistate randomized study conducted under the Health Care Financing Administration's (HCFA's) Health Care Quality Improvement Program (HCQIP) offered the opportunity to compare the effect of a written feedback intervention (WFI) with that of an enhanced feedback intervention (EFI) on improving the anticoagulant management of Medicare beneficiaries who present to the hospital with venous thromboembolic disease.
METHODS: Twenty-nine hospitals in five states were randomly assigned to receive written hospital-specific feedback (WFI) of feedback enhanced by the participation of a trained physician, quality improvement tools, and an Anticoagulant Management of Venous Thrombosis (AMVT) project liaison (EFI). Differences in the performance of five quality indicators between baseline and remeasurement were assessed. Quality managers were interviewed to determine perceptions of project implementation.
RESULTS: No significant differences in the change from baseline to remeasurement were found between the two intervention groups. Significant improvement in one indicator and significant decline in two indicators were found for one or both groups. Yet 59% of all quality managers perceived the AMVT project as being successful to very successful, and more EFI quality managers perceived success than did WFI managers (71% versus 40%). In the majority of EFI hospitals, physician liaisons played an important role in project implementation.
CONCLUSION: Study results indicated that the addition of a physician liaison, quality improvement tools, and a project liaison did not provide incremental value to hospital-specific feedback for improving quality of care. Future studies with larger sample sizes, lengthier follow-up periods, and interventions that include more of the elements shown to affect practice behavior change are needed to identify an optimal feedback model for use by external quality management organizations.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2001        PMID: 11242721     DOI: 10.1016/s1070-3241(01)27014-x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Jt Comm J Qual Improv        ISSN: 1070-3241


  3 in total

Review 1.  Does telling people what they have been doing change what they do? A systematic review of the effects of audit and feedback.

Authors:  Gro Jamtvedt; Jane M Young; Doris T Kristoffersen; Mary Ann O'Brien; Andrew D Oxman
Journal:  Qual Saf Health Care       Date:  2006-12

2.  Systematic review of interventions to improve safety and quality of anticoagulant prescribing for therapeutic indications for hospital inpatients.

Authors:  Andrew Frazer; James Rowland; Alison Mudge; Michael Barras; Jennifer Martin; Peter Donovan
Journal:  Eur J Clin Pharmacol       Date:  2019-09-11       Impact factor: 2.953

Review 3.  A systematic review of the use of theory in randomized controlled trials of audit and feedback.

Authors:  Heather L Colquhoun; Jamie C Brehaut; Anne Sales; Noah Ivers; Jeremy Grimshaw; Susan Michie; Kelly Carroll; Mathieu Chalifoux; Kevin W Eva
Journal:  Implement Sci       Date:  2013-06-10       Impact factor: 7.327

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.