Leif I Solberg1. 1. HealthPartners Research Foundation, Minneapolis, Minn 55440, USA. leif.i.solberg@healthpartners.com
Abstract
PURPOSE: The purpose of this article is to produce a relatively simple conceptual framework for guiding and studying practice improvement. METHODS: I summarize the lessons from my experience with a variety of quality improvement research studies during the last 30 years, supplemented with relevant literature from both medicine and other industries about the issues associated with successful quality improvement. RESULTS: My experience suggests that organizational leadership with an urgent vision for change, ability to manage the change process, and selection of systematic changes capable of fulfilling the vision are each critical for successful quality improvement. Published literature from other industries emphasizes the importance of a goal-directed change process managed by leaders who recognize the need to engage their employees and other leaders in a disciplined but flexible way that accommodates external and internal factors and uses teams and group learning. It also suggests the importance of organizational context and the level of external and internal barriers and facilitators for change. The resulting model proposes that priority, change process, and care process content are necessary for measurable improvements in quality of care and patient outcomes, although internal and external barriers must also be attended to and addressed. CONCLUSION: This framework may provide a guide to those in the front lines of care who would like to make the care transformations that are needed to greatly improve care. It may also be helpful to those who are developing or testing interventions and recruiting medical practices for such change efforts.
PURPOSE: The purpose of this article is to produce a relatively simple conceptual framework for guiding and studying practice improvement. METHODS: I summarize the lessons from my experience with a variety of quality improvement research studies during the last 30 years, supplemented with relevant literature from both medicine and other industries about the issues associated with successful quality improvement. RESULTS: My experience suggests that organizational leadership with an urgent vision for change, ability to manage the change process, and selection of systematic changes capable of fulfilling the vision are each critical for successful quality improvement. Published literature from other industries emphasizes the importance of a goal-directed change process managed by leaders who recognize the need to engage their employees and other leaders in a disciplined but flexible way that accommodates external and internal factors and uses teams and group learning. It also suggests the importance of organizational context and the level of external and internal barriers and facilitators for change. The resulting model proposes that priority, change process, and care process content are necessary for measurable improvements in quality of care and patient outcomes, although internal and external barriers must also be attended to and addressed. CONCLUSION: This framework may provide a guide to those in the front lines of care who would like to make the care transformations that are needed to greatly improve care. It may also be helpful to those who are developing or testing interventions and recruiting medical practices for such change efforts.
Authors: L I Solberg; M L Brekke; C J Fazio; J Fowles; D N Jacobsen; T E Kottke; G Mosser; P J O'Connor; K A Ohnsorg; S J Rolnick Journal: Jt Comm J Qual Improv Date: 2000-04
Authors: L I Solberg; T E Kottke; M L Brekke; S Magnan; G Davidson; C A Calomeni; S A Conn; G M Amundson; A F Nelson Journal: Eff Clin Pract Date: 2000 May-Jun
Authors: Leif I Solberg; Michael V Maciosek; JoAnn M Sperl-Hillen; A Lauren Crain; Karen I Engebretson; Brent R Asplin; Patrick J O'Connor Journal: Am J Manag Care Date: 2004-10 Impact factor: 2.229
Authors: Leif I Solberg; Russell E Glasgow; Jürgen Unützer; Nancy Jaeckels; Gary Oftedahl; Arne Beck; Michael V Maciosek; A Lauren Crain Journal: Med Care Date: 2010-07 Impact factor: 2.983
Authors: Andrada Tomoaia-Cotisel; Debra L Scammon; Norman J Waitzman; Peter F Cronholm; Jacqueline R Halladay; David L Driscoll; Leif I Solberg; Clarissa Hsu; Ming Tai-Seale; Vanessa Hiratsuka; Sarah C Shih; Michael D Fetters; Christopher G Wise; Jeffrey A Alexander; Diane Hauser; Carmit K McMullen; Sarah Hudson Scholle; Manasi A Tirodkar; Laura Schmidt; Katrina E Donahue; Michael L Parchman; Kurt C Stange Journal: Ann Fam Med Date: 2013 May-Jun Impact factor: 5.166
Authors: Michael L Parchman; Melissa L Anderson; David A Dorr; Lyle J Fagnan; Ellen S O'Meara; Leah Tuzzio; Robert B Penfold; Andrea J Cook; Jeffrey Hummel; Cullen Conway; Raja Cholan; Laura-Mae Baldwin Journal: Ann Fam Med Date: 2019-08-12 Impact factor: 5.166
Authors: Stephan Lindner; Leif I Solberg; William L Miller; Bijal A Balasubramanian; Miguel Marino; K John McConnell; Samuel T Edwards; Kurt C Stange; Rachel J Springer; Deborah J Cohen Journal: J Am Board Fam Med Date: 2019 May-Jun Impact factor: 2.657
Authors: Caroline S Blaum; Jonathan Rosen; Aanand D Naik; Cynthia D Smith; Lilian Dindo; Lauren Vo; Kizzy Hernandez-Bigos; Jessica Esterson; Mary Geda; Rosie Ferris; Darce Costello; Denise Acampora; Thomas Meehan; Mary E Tinetti Journal: J Am Geriatr Soc Date: 2018-10-03 Impact factor: 5.562
Authors: Alvaro Sanchez; Gonzalo Grandes; Josep M Cortada; Haizea Pombo; Laura Balague; Carlos Calderon Journal: BMC Health Serv Res Date: 2009-06-18 Impact factor: 2.655