OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effectiveness of quality improvement collaboratives in improving the quality of care. DATA SOURCES: Relevant studies through Medline, Embase, PsycINFO, CINAHL, and Cochrane databases. STUDY SELECTION: Two reviewers independently extracted data on topics, participants, setting, study design, and outcomes. DATA SYNTHESIS: Of 1104 articles identified, 72 were included in the study. Twelve reports representing nine studies (including two randomised controlled trials) used a controlled design to measure the effects of the quality improvement collaborative intervention on care processes or outcomes of care. Systematic review of these nine studies showed moderate positive results. Seven studies (including one randomised controlled trial) reported an effect on some of the selected outcome measures. Two studies (including one randomised controlled trial) did not show any significant effect. CONCLUSIONS: The evidence underlying quality improvement collaboratives is positive but limited and the effects cannot be predicted with great certainty. Considering that quality improvement collaboratives seem to play a key part in current strategies focused on accelerating improvement, but may have only modest effects on outcomes at best, further knowledge of the basic components effectiveness, cost effectiveness, and success factors is crucial to determine the value of quality improvement collaboratives.
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effectiveness of quality improvement collaboratives in improving the quality of care. DATA SOURCES: Relevant studies through Medline, Embase, PsycINFO, CINAHL, and Cochrane databases. STUDY SELECTION: Two reviewers independently extracted data on topics, participants, setting, study design, and outcomes. DATA SYNTHESIS: Of 1104 articles identified, 72 were included in the study. Twelve reports representing nine studies (including two randomised controlled trials) used a controlled design to measure the effects of the quality improvement collaborative intervention on care processes or outcomes of care. Systematic review of these nine studies showed moderate positive results. Seven studies (including one randomised controlled trial) reported an effect on some of the selected outcome measures. Two studies (including one randomised controlled trial) did not show any significant effect. CONCLUSIONS: The evidence underlying quality improvement collaboratives is positive but limited and the effects cannot be predicted with great certainty. Considering that quality improvement collaboratives seem to play a key part in current strategies focused on accelerating improvement, but may have only modest effects on outcomes at best, further knowledge of the basic components effectiveness, cost effectiveness, and success factors is crucial to determine the value of quality improvement collaboratives.
Authors: J ØVretveit; P Bate; P Cleary; S Cretin; D Gustafson; K McInnes; H McLeod; T Molfenter; P Plsek; G Robert; S Shortell; T Wilson Journal: Qual Saf Health Care Date: 2002-12
Authors: Lea R Ayers; Suzanne C Beyea; Marjorie M Godfrey; Doreen C Harper; Eugene C Nelson; Paul B Batalden Journal: Qual Manag Health Care Date: 2005 Oct-Dec Impact factor: 0.926
Authors: Jill A Marsteller; Stephen M Shortell; Michael Lin; Peter Mendel; Elizabeth Dell; Stephanie Wang; Shan Cretin; Marjorie L Pearson; Shin-Yi Wu; Mayde Rosen Journal: Jt Comm J Qual Patient Saf Date: 2007-05
Authors: Stephen M Shortell; Jill A Marsteller; Michael Lin; Marjorie L Pearson; Shin-Yi Wu; Peter Mendel; Shan Cretin; Mayde Rosen Journal: Med Care Date: 2004-11 Impact factor: 2.983
Authors: Loes M T Schouten; Marlies E J L Hulscher; Reinier Akkermans; Jannes J E van Everdingen; Richard P T M Grol; Robbert Huijsman Journal: Stroke Date: 2008-07-10 Impact factor: 7.914
Authors: Eric K Shaw; Sabrina M Chase; Jenna Howard; Paul A Nutting; Benjamin F Crabtree Journal: J Am Board Fam Med Date: 2012 Mar-Apr Impact factor: 2.657
Authors: Julie Sarno Owens; Aaron R Lyon; Nicole Evangelista Brandt; Carrie Masia Warner; Erum Nadeem; Craig Spiel; Mary Wagner Journal: School Ment Health Date: 2014-05-01
Authors: Daniel H Solomon; Elena Losina; Bing Lu; Agnes Zak; Cassandra Corrigan; Sara B Lee; Jenifer Agosti; Asaf Bitton; Leslie R Harrold; Theodore Pincus; Helga Radner; Zhi Yu; Josef S Smolen; Liana Fraenkel; Jeffrey N Katz Journal: Arthritis Rheumatol Date: 2017-05-31 Impact factor: 10.995