Marjo J Campmans-Kuijpers1, Caroline A Baan2, Lidwien C Lemmens2, Guy E Rutten3. 1. Julius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, the Netherlands m.j.e.campmans-kuijpers@umcutrecht.nl. 2. Center for Nutrition, Prevention and Health Services, National Institute for Public Health and the Environment, Bilthoven, the Netherlands. 3. Julius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, the Netherlands.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To assess the change in level of diabetes quality management in primary care groups and outpatient clinics after feedback and tailored support. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: This before-and-after study with a 1-year follow-up surveyed quality managers on six domains of quality management. Questionnaires measured organization of care, multidisciplinary teamwork, patient centeredness, performance results, quality improvement policy, and management strategies (score range 0-100%). Based on the scores, responders received feedback and a benchmark and were granted access to a toolbox of quality improvement instruments. If requested, additional support in improving quality management was available, consisting of an elucidating phone call or a visit from an experienced consultant. After 1 year, the level of quality management was measured again. RESULTS: Of the initially 60 participating care groups, 51 completed the study. The total quality management score improved from 59.8% (95% CI 57.0-62.6%) to 65.1% (62.8-67.5%; P < 0.0001). The same applied to all six domains. The feedback and benchmark improved the total quality management score (P = 0.001). Of the 44 participating outpatient clinics, 28 completed the study. Their total score changed from 65.7% (CI 60.3-71.1%) to 67.3% (CI 62.9-71.7%; P = 0.30). Only the results in the domain multidisciplinary teamwork improved (P = 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Measuring quality management and providing feedback and a benchmark improves the level of quality management in care groups but not in outpatient clinics. The questionnaires might also be a useful asset for other diabetes care groups, such as Accountable Care Organizations.
OBJECTIVE: To assess the change in level of diabetes quality management in primary care groups and outpatient clinics after feedback and tailored support. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: This before-and-after study with a 1-year follow-up surveyed quality managers on six domains of quality management. Questionnaires measured organization of care, multidisciplinary teamwork, patient centeredness, performance results, quality improvement policy, and management strategies (score range 0-100%). Based on the scores, responders received feedback and a benchmark and were granted access to a toolbox of quality improvement instruments. If requested, additional support in improving quality management was available, consisting of an elucidating phone call or a visit from an experienced consultant. After 1 year, the level of quality management was measured again. RESULTS: Of the initially 60 participating care groups, 51 completed the study. The total quality management score improved from 59.8% (95% CI 57.0-62.6%) to 65.1% (62.8-67.5%; P < 0.0001). The same applied to all six domains. The feedback and benchmark improved the total quality management score (P = 0.001). Of the 44 participating outpatient clinics, 28 completed the study. Their total score changed from 65.7% (CI 60.3-71.1%) to 67.3% (CI 62.9-71.7%; P = 0.30). Only the results in the domain multidisciplinary teamwork improved (P = 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Measuring quality management and providing feedback and a benchmark improves the level of quality management in care groups but not in outpatient clinics. The questionnaires might also be a useful asset for other diabetes care groups, such as Accountable Care Organizations.
Authors: Marjo J E Campmans-Kuijpers; Caroline A Baan; Lidwien C Lemmens; Maarten L H Klomp; Arnold C M Romeijnders; Guy E H M Rutten Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2015-05-11 Impact factor: 2.692
Authors: Rimke C Vos; Nathalie W D Eikelenboom; Maarten Klomp; Rebecca K Stellato; Guy E H M Rutten Journal: Diabetol Metab Syndr Date: 2016-12-20 Impact factor: 3.320
Authors: Maaike C M Ronda; Lioe-Ting Dijkhorst-Oei; Rimke C Vos; Paul Westers; Guy E H M Rutten Journal: PLoS One Date: 2018-12-05 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Sara Abdulrhim; Sowndramalingam Sankaralingam; Mohamed Izham Mohamed Ibrahim; Mohammed Issam Diab; Mohamed Abdelazim Mohamed Hussain; Hend Al Raey; Mohammed Thahir Ismail; Ahmed Awaisu Journal: BMC Health Serv Res Date: 2021-03-02 Impact factor: 2.655
Authors: Lidwien C Lemmens; Simone R de Bruin; Jeroen N Struijs; Mieke Rijken; Giel Nijpels; Caroline A Baan Journal: Int J Integr Care Date: 2015-12-15 Impact factor: 5.120
Authors: Anna Lindholm-Olinder; Johan Fischier; Jenny Fries; Sven Alfonsson; Veronika Elvingson; Jan W Eriksson; Janeth Leksell Journal: BMC Nurs Date: 2015-11-19