Literature DB >> 26289233

Clinical Communities at Johns Hopkins Medicine: An Emerging Approach to Quality Improvement.

Lois J Gould1, Patricia A Wachter, Hanan Aboumatar, Renee J Blanding, Daniel J Brotman, Janine Bullard, Maureen M Gilmore, Sherita Hill Golden, Eric Howell, Lisa Ishii, K H Ken Lee, Martin G Paul, Leo C Rotello, Andrew J Satin, Elizabeth C Wick, Laura Winner, Michael E Zenilman, Peter J Pronovost.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Clinical communities are an emerging approach to quality improvement (QI) to which several large-scale projects have attributed some success. In 2011 the Armstrong Institute for Patient Safety and Quality established clinical communities as a core strategy to connect frontline providers from six different hospitals to improve quality of care, patient safety, and value across the health system. CLINICAL COMMUNITIES: Fourteen clinical communities that presented great opportunity for improvement were established. A community could focus on a clinical area, a patient population, a group, a process, a safety-related issue, or nearly any health care issue. The collaborative spirit of the communities embraced interdisciplinary membership and representation from each hospital in each community. Communities engaged in team-building activities and facilitated discussions, met monthly, and were encouraged to meet in person to develop relationships and build trust. After a community was established, patients and families were invited to join and share their perspectives and experiences. ENABLING STRUCTURES: The clinical community structure provided clinicians access to resources, such as technical experts and safety and QI researchers, that were not easily otherwise accessible or available. Communities convened clinicians from each hospital to consider safety problems and their resolution and share learning with workplace peers and local unit safety teams.
CONCLUSION: The clinical communities engaged 195 clinicians from across the health system in QI projects and peer learning. Challenges included limited financial support and time for clinicians, timely access to data, limited resources from the health system, and not enough time with improvement experts.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26289233     DOI: 10.1016/s1553-7250(15)41050-5

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Jt Comm J Qual Patient Saf        ISSN: 1553-7250


  6 in total

1.  Physician Motivation: Listening to What Pay-for-Performance Programs and Quality Improvement Collaboratives Are Telling Us.

Authors:  Kurt R Herzer; Peter J Pronovost
Journal:  Jt Comm J Qual Patient Saf       Date:  2015-11

2.  A Gap Analysis Needs Assessment Tool to Drive a Care Delivery and Research Agenda for Integration of Care and Sharing of Best Practices Across a Health System.

Authors:  Sherita Hill Golden; Daniel Hager; Lois J Gould; Nestoras Mathioudakis; Peter J Pronovost
Journal:  Jt Comm J Qual Patient Saf       Date:  2016-10-13

3.  How successful was the use of a community of practice for the implementation of evidence-based practices for heart failure within the United States Department of Veterans Affairs: Insights from a formative evaluation.

Authors:  Anju Sahay; Brian S Mittman; Parisa Gholami; Shoutzu Lin; Paul A Heidenreich
Journal:  Health Res Policy Syst       Date:  2022-07-08

4.  The New Paradigm in Community-Based Care: Managing Mindset and Expectations.

Authors:  Fatimah Lateef
Journal:  J Emerg Trauma Shock       Date:  2018 Jul-Sep

5.  Development, Implementation, and Evaluation of a Physician-Targeted Inpatient Glycemic Management Curriculum.

Authors:  Nestoras Mathioudakis; Holly Bashura; LaPricia Boyér; Susan Langan; Bama S Padmanaban; Shamil Fayzullin; Sam Sokolinsky; Sherita Hill Golden
Journal:  J Med Educ Curric Dev       Date:  2019-07-15

6.  Optimising the community-based approach to healthcare improvement: Comparative case studies of the clinical community model in practice.

Authors:  Emma-Louise Aveling; Graham Martin; Georgia Herbert; Natalie Armstrong
Journal:  Soc Sci Med       Date:  2016-11-22       Impact factor: 4.634

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.