| Literature DB >> 28393064 |
Cindy Woods1, Karen Carlisle2, Sarah Larkins2, Sandra Claire Thompson3, Komla Tsey4, Veronica Matthews5, Ross Bailie6.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Continuous Quality Improvement is a process for raising the quality of primary health care (PHC) across Indigenous PHC services. In addition to clinical auditing using plan, do, study, and act cycles, engaging staff in a process of reflecting on systems to support quality care is vital. The One21seventy Systems Assessment Tool (SAT) supports staff to assess systems performance in terms of five key components. This study examines quantitative and qualitative SAT data from five high-improving Indigenous PHC services in northern Australia to understand the systems used to support quality care.Entities:
Keywords: Indigenous health; primary health care; primary health services; quality improvement; systems improvement
Year: 2017 PMID: 28393064 PMCID: PMC5364947 DOI: 10.3389/fpubh.2017.00045
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Public Health ISSN: 2296-2565
Components of the Systems Assessment Tool.
| Components | Items for each component | |
|---|---|---|
| Delivery system design |
Team structure and function Clinical leadership Appointments and scheduling Care planning Systematic approach to follow-up Continuity of care Client access/cultural competence Physical infrastructure, supplies, and equipment | |
| Information systems and decision support |
Maintenance and use of electronic client lists Evidence-based guidelines Specialist–generalist collaborations | |
| Self-management support |
Assessment and documentation Self-management education and support, behavior risk reduction, and peer support | |
| Links with community, other health services, and other services |
Communication and cooperation on governance and operation of the health center and other community-based organizations and programs Linking health center clients to outside resources Working in the community Communication and cooperation on regional health planning and development of health resources | |
| Organizational influence and integration |
Organizational commitment Quality improvement strategies Integration of health system components | |
.
Characteristics of the selected high-improving services.
| Site | State | Governance | Rurality | Population | High improvement in | Conduct of Continuous Quality Improvement (CQI) audits and SAT tools |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | QLD | Government | Remote | ≤500 | T2DM |
CQI coordinators have conducted the CQI audits each year from 2011 to 2013 In 2014, QLD Health ceased investment in CQI audits The 2015 audits were facilitated by the project team SAT tools: completed by cluster coordinator Goals for improvement are not set, shared, or implemented with local staff |
| 2 | QLD | Government | Remote | ≤500 | T2DM |
CQI coordinators have conducted the CQI audits each year from 2011 to 2013 In 2014, QLD Health ceased investment in CQI audits The 2015 audits were facilitated by the project team SAT tools: feedback sessions with the cluster coordinator—local staff develop and implement goals for improvement |
| 3 | WA | Government/CC partnership | Remote | ≥1,000 | Maternal |
Senior staff from regional population health unit conducts the audits with support from Menzies SAT tools: based on data from the partnership’s health-care center and conducted by an external facilitator |
| 4 | NT | Government | Regional | 501–999 | Maternal |
Health service manager organizes and conducts the CQI audits with the assistance of all other clinical staff SAT tools: all staff review reports, look at areas needing improvement and set goals Goals for improvement are discussed in meetings (regular agenda item), general observations, shared decisions on goal for improvement |
| 5 | NT | Community controlled | Remote | 501–999 | Preventive |
CQI audits conducted by primary health-care coordinator located at regional health service organization SAT tools: service participates in weekly QI discussions |
QLD, Queensland; WA, Western Australia; NT, Northern Territory; SAT, Systems Assessment Tool.
Year and tool of Systems Assessment Tool (SAT) completed at each site.
| 2006 | 2007 | 2008 | 2009 | 2010 | 2011 | 2012 | 2013 | 2014 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Maternal health | X | X | X | ||||||
| T2 diabetes | X | X | X | ||||||
| Maternal health | X | X | X | ||||||
| Child health | X | X | X | ||||||
| T2 diabetes | X | X | X | ||||||
| Maternal health | X | X | X | X | |||||
| T2 diabetes | X | X | X | X | X | ||||
| Maternal health | X | X | X | X | |||||
| Preventive health | X | X | X | X | X | ||||
| Child health | X | X | A | A | |||||
| Preventive health | X | X | X | A | |||||
X, CQI audit and SAT completed.
A, CQI audit completed but not SAT.
Figure 1Service 1: type 2 diabetes and maternal health combined.
Figure 5(A) Service 5: preventive health. (B) Service 5: child health.
Figure 3(A) Service 3: type 2 diabetes. (B) Service 3: maternal health.
Mean scores for Systems Assessment Tool cycles.
| Site | Cycle 1 | Cycle 2 | Cycle 3 | Cycle 4 | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Delivery system design | 6 | 8 | 7 | 22 | 0.34 | |
| Info system and decision support | 6 | 8 | 6 | 5 | 0.82 | |
| Self-management | 4 | 8 | 8 | – | – | |
| Links | 4 | 7 | 4 | 10 | 0.64 | |
| Organization and integration | 5 | 7 | 3 | 7 | 0.37 | |
| Delivery system design | 6 | 8 | 8 | 19 | 0.18 | |
| Info system and decision support | 7 | 6 | 7 | 4 | 1 | |
| Self-management | 6 | 7 | 7 | – | – | |
| Links | 3 | 5 | 6 | 0 | ||
| Organization and integration | 6 | 6 | 6 | 3 | 0.65 | |
| Delivery system design | 3 | 3 | 6 | 5 | 9 | |
| Info system and decision support | 3 | 5 | 7 | 7 | 0 | 0.07 |
| Self-management | 2 | 4 | 4 | 6 | 0 | 0.22 |
| Links | 4 | 6 | 4 | 5 | 3 | 0.19 |
| Organization and integration | 2 | 5 | 3 | 7 | 0 | 0.07 |
| Delivery system design | 4 | 7 | 0 | 6 | 14 | 0.06 |
| Info system and decision support | 3 | 8 | 0 | 9 | 0 | 0.07 |
| Self-management | 2 | 5 | 0 | 6 | 0 | 0.22 |
| Links | 4 | 6 | 0 | 7 | 2 | 0.10 |
| Organization and integration | 2 | 5 | 0 | 7 | 0 | 0.07 |
| Delivery system design | 10 | 10 | 10 | 34 | 0.85 | |
| Info system and decision support | 9 | 11 | 11 | 4 | 1 | |
| Self-management | 8 | 11 | 11 | 0 | 0.22 | |
| Links | 4 | 11 | 10 | 0 | ||
| Organization and integration | 9 | 11 | 11 | 0 | 0.06 | |
| Delivery system design | 7 | 11 | 11 | 11 | 0 | |
| Info system and decision support | 4 | 9 | 11 | 11 | 0 | 0.07 |
| Self-management | 8 | 8 | 11 | 11 | 0 | 0.22 |
| Links | 4 | 4 | 11 | 10 | 0 | |
| Organization and integration | 7 | 9 | 11 | 11 | 0 | 0.05 |
| Delivery system design | 7 | 6 | 9 | 11 | ||
| Info system and decision support | 5 | 9 | 8 | 0 | 0.07 | |
| Self-management | 5 | 6 | 6 | 1 | 1 | |
| Links | 7 | 7 | 8 | 6 | 0.66 | |
| Organization and integration | 4 | 8 | 9 | 0 | 0.07 | |
| Delivery system design | 6 | 8 | 13 | |||
| Info system and decision support | 6 | 8 | 3 | 0.81 | ||
| Self-management | 6 | 6 | 2 | 1 | ||
| Links | 7 | 8 | 4 | 0.30 | ||
| Organization and integration | 8 | 9 | 2 | 0.48 | ||
–, indicates numbers are too small to perform statistical test.
Bold font indicates statistically significant P values.
Figure 4(A) Service 4: maternal health. (B) Service 4: preventive health.
Figure 2Service 2: type 2 diabetes, child and preventive health combined.