Assuntos
Cirurgia Colorretal , Infecções por Coronavirus/epidemiologia , Enteropatias/cirurgia , Pandemias/estatística & dados numéricos , Pneumonia Viral/epidemiologia , Atitude do Pessoal de Saúde , Atitude Frente a Saúde , Betacoronavirus , COVID-19 , Procedimentos Cirúrgicos Eletivos , Humanos , Entrevistas como Assunto , Prática Profissional , SARS-CoV-2 , Telemedicina , Estados Unidos/epidemiologiaRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Collaborative quality improvement is an established method to conduct quality improvement in surgical care. Despite the success of this method, little is known about the experiences, perceptions, and attitudes of those who participate in collaborative quality improvement. The following study elicited common themes associated with the experiences and perceptions of surgeons participating in collaborative quality improvement. METHODS: We conducted an interpretive description qualitative study of surgeons participating in the Michigan Surgical Quality Collaborative, which is a statewide collaborative quality improvement consortium in Michigan. Semi-structured interviews were conducted using an interview guide. RESULTS: A sample of 24 participants completed interviews with a mean (SD) age of 48.7 (11.5) years and 16 (80%) male participants. Two major themes were identified. First, the contextualization of individual performance was seen as key to identifying opportunities for improvement and creating motivation to improve. Contextualization of individual performance relative to peer performance was collaborative rather than punitive. Second, peer learning emerged as the primary way to inform practice change and overcome hesitancy to change. Rather than draw upon external evidence, practice change within the collaborative was informed by the practices of peer institutions. Both themes were strongly exemplified in one of the Michigan Surgical Quality Collaborative's largest initiatives-reducing excessive postoperative opioid prescribing. CONCLUSION: In this qualitative study of surgeons participating in statewide collaborative quality improvement, contextualization of individual outcomes and peer learning were the most salient themes. Collaborative quality improvement relied upon comparing one's own performance to peer performance, motivating improvement using this comparison, deriving evidence from peers to inform improvement initiatives, and overcoming hesitancy to change by highlighting peer success.