Understanding the components of quality improvement collaboratives: a systematic literature review.

CONTEXT: In response to national efforts to improve quality of care, policymakers and health care leaders have increasingly turned to quality improvement collaboratives (QICs) as an efficient approach to improving provider practices and patient outcomes through the dissemination of evidence-based practices. This article presents findings from a systematic review of the literature on QICs, focusing on the identification of common components of QICs in health care and exploring, when possible, relations between QIC components and outcomes at the patient or provider level. METHODS: A systematic search of five major health care databases generated 294 unique articles, twenty-four of which met our criteria for inclusion in our final analysis. These articles pertained to either randomized controlled trials or quasi-experimental studies with comparison groups, and they reported the findings from twenty different studies of QICs in health care. We coded the articles to identify the components reported for each collaborative. FINDINGS: We found fourteen crosscutting components as common ingredients in health care QICs (e.g., in-person learning sessions, phone meetings, data reporting, leadership involvement, and training in QI methods). The collaboratives reported included, on average, six to seven of these components. The most common were in-person learning sessions, plan-do-study-act (PDSA) cycles, multidisciplinary QI teams, and data collection for QI. The outcomes data from these studies indicate the greatest impact of QICs at the provider level; patient-level findings were less robust. CONCLUSIONS: Reporting on specific components of the collaborative was imprecise across articles, rendering it impossible to identify active QIC ingredients linked to improved care. Although QICs appear to have some promise in improving the process of care, there is great need for further controlled research examining the core components of these collaboratives related to patient- and provider-level outcomes.

The role of consultation calls for clinic supervisors in supporting large-scale dissemination of evidence-based treatments for children.

This study explores the content of consultation provided to clinic supervisors within the context of a statewide training program in an evidence-based practice. Minute-to-minute live coding of consultation calls with clinic supervisors was conducted in order to identify the content and distribution of call topics. Results indicated that approximately half of the total speaking time was spent on a range of clinically relevant topics (e.g., cognitive-behavioral therapy techniques, fidelity to the treatment protocols). The remaining time was spent on program administration and CBT-related supervisory issues. This pilot study has broad implications for structuring the content of consultation process in large-scale dissemination efforts involving multiple portions of the clinical workforce.

A Narrative Synthesis of the Components of and Evidence for Patient- and Family-Centered Care.

A narrative synthesis was conducted to determine typical patient- and family-centered care (PFCC) components and their link to outcomes in pediatric populations. 68 studies with PFCC interventions and experimental designs were included. Study features were synthesized based on 5 core PFCC components (i.e., education from the provider to the patient and/or family, information sharing from the family to the provider, social-emotional support, adapting care to match family background, and/or s decision-making) and 4 outcome categories (health status; the experience, knowledge, and attitudes of the patient/family; patient/family behavior; or provider behavior). The most common PFCC component was education; the least common was adapting care to family background. The presence of social-emotional support alone, as well as educational interventions augmented with shared decision-making, social-emotional support, or adaptations of care based on family background, predicted improvements in families' knowledge, attitudes, and experience. Interventions that targeted the family were associated with positive outcomes.

A literature review of learning collaboratives in mental health care: used but untested.

OBJECTIVE: Policy makers have increasingly turned to learning collaboratives (LCs) as a strategy for improving usual care through the dissemination of evidence-based practices. The purpose of this review was to characterize the state of the evidence for use of LCs in mental health care. METHODS: A systematic search of major academic databases for peer-reviewed articles on LCs in mental health care generated 421 unique articles across a range of disciplines; 28 mental health articles were selected for full-text review, and 20 articles representing 16 distinct studies met criteria for final inclusion. Articles were coded to identify the LC components reported, the focus of the research, and key findings. RESULTS: Most of the articles included assessments of provider- or patient-level variables at baseline and post-LC. Only one study included a comparison condition. LC targets ranged widely, from use of a depression screening tool to implementation of evidence-based treatments. Fourteen crosscutting LC components (for example, in-person learning sessions, phone meetings, data reporting, leadership involvement, and training in quality improvement methods) were identified. The LCs reviewed reported including, on average, seven components, most commonly in-person learning sessions, plan-do-study-act cycles, multidisciplinary quality improvement teams, and data collection for quality improvement. CONCLUSIONS: LCs are being used widely in mental health care, although there is minimal evidence of their effectiveness and unclear reporting in regard to specific components. Rigorous observational and controlled research studies on the impact of LCs on targeted provider- and patient-level outcomes are greatly needed.