BMJ  2008;336:1448-1449 (28 June), doi:10.1136/bmj.a216 (published 24 June 2008)

Editorials

Effects of quality improvement collaboratives

Are difficult to measure using traditional biomedical research methods

The first 150 words of the full text of this article appear below.

In the linked study, Schouten and colleagues report a systematic review of the effectiveness of quality improvement collaboratives in improving the quality of care. They conclude that the evidence supporting these collaboratives is positive but limited and their effects are difficult to predict.¹

Despite limited evidence, the quality improvement collaborative is one of the most popular methods for organising improvement efforts at hospitals and ambulatory practices worldwide. Quality improvement collaboratives in health care date back to the mid-1980s, and some of the earliest and most successful examples include the Northern New England Cardiovascular Disease Study Group, the US Veterans’ Affairs National Surgical Quality Improvement Program, and the Vermont Oxford Network. These ongoing initiatives have improved care and saved many lives at participating hospitals.^{2 3 4}

In the 1990s, the Institute for Healthcare Improvement, the pre-eminent quality improvement organisation in the United States, popularised a quality improvement model they called the breakthrough series.⁵ . . . [Full text of this article]

¹ Center for Quality and Safety Research, Baystate Medical Center and Tufts University School of Medicine, Springfield MA, 01199, USA

CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    What's this?

Relevant Article

Evidence for the impact of quality improvement collaboratives: systematic review

Loes M T Schouten, Marlies E J L Hulscher, Jannes J E van Everdingen, Robbert Huijsman, and Richard P T M Grol
BMJ 2008 336: 1491-1494. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Rapid Responses:

Read all Rapid Responses

Randomised controlled trials have an important place in evaluating quality improvement initiatives.

Martin P Eccles, et al.
bmj.com, 12 Jul 2008 [Full text]