Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 9 de 9
Filter
1.
PLoS One ; 14(1): e0209637, 2019.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30625190

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: In order to determine the extent to which care delivered to children is appropriate (in line with evidence-based care and/or clinical practice guidelines (CPGs)) in Australia, we developed a set of clinical indicators for 21 common paediatric medical conditions for use across a range of primary, secondary and tertiary healthcare practice facilities. METHODS: Clinical indicators were extracted from recommendations found through systematic searches of national and international guidelines, and formatted with explicit criteria for inclusion, exclusion, time frame and setting. Experts reviewed the indicators using a multi-round modified Delphi process and collaborative online wiki to develop consensus on what constituted appropriate care. RESULTS: From 121 clinical practice guidelines, 1098 recommendations were used to draft 451 proposed appropriateness indicators. In total, 61 experts (n = 24 internal reviewers, n = 37 external reviewers) reviewed these indicators over 40 weeks. A final set of 234 indicators resulted, from which 597 indicator items were derived suitable for medical record audit. Most indicator items were geared towards capturing information about under-use in healthcare (n = 551, 92%) across emergency department (n = 457, 77%), hospital (n = 450, 75%) and general practice (n = 434, 73%) healthcare facilities, and based on consensus level recommendations (n = 451, 76%). The main reason for rejecting indicators was 'feasibility' (likely to be able to be used for determining compliance with 'appropriate care' from medical record audit). CONCLUSION: A set of indicators was developed for the appropriateness of care for 21 paediatric conditions. We describe the processes (methods), provenance (origins and evolution of indicators) and products (indicator characteristics) of creating clinical indicators within the context of Australian healthcare settings. Developing consensus on clinical appropriateness indicators using a Delphi approach and collaborative online wiki has methodological utility. The final indicator set can be used by clinicians and organisations to measure and reflect on their own practice.


Subject(s)
Evidence-Based Medicine , Pediatrics/standards , Quality Indicators, Health Care , Australia , Child , Humans , Quality Assurance, Health Care
2.
JAMA ; 319(11): 1113-1124, 2018 03 20.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29558552

ABSTRACT

Importance: The quality of routine care for children is rarely assessed, and then usually in single settings or for single clinical conditions. Objective: To estimate the quality of health care for children in Australia in inpatient and ambulatory health care settings. Design, Setting, and Participants: Multistage stratified sample with medical record review to assess adherence with quality indicators extracted from clinical practice guidelines for 17 common, high-burden clinical conditions (noncommunicable [n = 5], mental health [n = 4], acute infection [n = 7], and injury [n = 1]), such as asthma, attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder, tonsillitis, and head injury. For these 17 conditions, 479 quality indicators were identified, with the number varying by condition, ranging from 9 for eczema to 54 for head injury. Four hundred medical records were targeted for sampling for each of 15 conditions while 267 records were targeted for anxiety and 133 for depression. Within each selected medical record, all visits for the 17 targeted conditions were identified, and separate quality assessments made for each. Care was evaluated for 6689 children 15 years of age and younger who had 15 240 visits to emergency departments, for inpatient admissions, or to pediatricians and general practitioners in selected urban and rural locations in 3 Australian states. These visits generated 160 202 quality indicator assessments. Exposures: Quality indicators were identified through a systematic search of local and international guidelines. Individual indicators were extracted from guidelines and assessed using a 2-stage Delphi process. Main Outcomes and Measures: Quality of care for each clinical condition and overall. Results: Of 6689 children with surveyed medical records, 53.6% were aged 0 to 4 years and 55.5% were male. Adherence to quality of care indicators was estimated at 59.8% (95% CI, 57.5%-62.0%; n = 160 202) across the 17 conditions, ranging from a high of 88.8% (95% CI, 83.0%-93.1%; n = 2638) for autism to a low of 43.5% (95% CI, 36.8%-50.4%; n = 2354) for tonsillitis. The mean adherence by condition category was estimated as 60.5% (95% CI, 57.2%-63.8%; n = 41 265) for noncommunicable conditions (range, 52.8%-75.8%); 82.4% (95% CI, 79.0%-85.5%; n = 14 622) for mental health conditions (range, 71.5%-88.8%); 56.3% (95% CI, 53.2%-59.4%; n = 94 037) for acute infections (range, 43.5%-69.8%); and 78.3% (95% CI, 75.1%-81.2%; n = 10 278) for injury. Conclusions and Relevance: Among a sample of children receiving care in Australia in 2012-2013, the overall prevalence of adherence to quality of care indicators for important conditions was not high. For many of these conditions, the quality of care may be inadequate.


Subject(s)
Child Health Services/standards , Guideline Adherence/statistics & numerical data , Quality Indicators, Health Care , Quality of Health Care/statistics & numerical data , Adolescent , Australia , Child , Child, Preschool , Disease Management , Female , Humans , Infant , Infant, Newborn , Male
3.
BMJ Qual Saf ; 26(9): 734-742, 2017 Sep.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28232390

ABSTRACT

AIM: To evaluate the effectiveness of a 'Do not interrupt' bundled intervention to reduce non-medication-related interruptions to nurses during medication administration. METHODS: A parallel eight cluster randomised controlled study was conducted in a major teaching hospital in Adelaide, Australia. Four wards were randomised to the intervention which comprised wearing a vest when administering medications; strategies for diverting interruptions; clinician and patient education; and reminders. Control wards were blinded to the intervention. Structured direct observations of medication administration processes were conducted. The primary outcome was non-medication-related interruptions during individual medication dose administrations. The secondary outcomes were total interruption and multitasking rates. A survey of nurses' experiences was administered. RESULTS: Over 8 weeks and 364.7 hours, 227 nurses were observed administering 4781 medications. At baseline, nurses experienced 57 interruptions/100 administrations, 87.9% were unrelated to the medication task being observed. Intervention wards experienced a significant reduction in non-medication-related interruptions from 50/100 administrations (95% CI 45 to 55) to 34/100 (95% CI 30 to 38). Controlling for clustering, ward type and medication route showed a significant reduction of 15 non-medication-related interruptions/100 administrations compared with control wards. A total of 88 nurses (38.8%) completed the poststudy survey. Intervention ward nurses reported that vests were time consuming, cumbersome and hot. Only 48% indicated that they would support the intervention becoming hospital policy. DISCUSSION: Nurses experienced a high rate of interruptions. Few were related to the medication task, demonstrating considerable scope to reduce unnecessary interruptions. While the intervention was associated with a statistically significant decline in non-medication-related interruptions, the magnitude of this reduction and its likely impact on error rates should be considered, relative to the effectiveness of alternate interventions, associated costs, likely acceptability and long-term sustainability of such interventions.


Subject(s)
Medication Errors/nursing , Medication Errors/prevention & control , Medication Systems, Hospital/organization & administration , Nursing Staff, Hospital/organization & administration , Safety Management/organization & administration , Australia , Feasibility Studies , Hospitals, Teaching/organization & administration , Humans , Medication Systems, Hospital/standards , Nursing Staff, Hospital/standards , Single-Blind Method
4.
Spine (Phila Pa 1976) ; 42(13): E802-E809, 2017 Jul 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-27831965

ABSTRACT

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective medical record review to assess compliance with low back pain (LBP) care indicators. OBJECTIVE: To establish baseline estimates of the appropriateness of LBP care in the general Australian population provided by a range of healthcare providers in various real-world settings. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: LBP is a costly condition and accounts for the greatest burden of disease worldwide, yet the care provided is often at variance with guidelines. No baseline estimates of performance are currently available in Australia across various aspects of LBP care, practitioners, and settings. METHODS: A population-based sample of patients with 22 common conditions was recruited by telephone; consents were obtained to review their medical records against indicators ("CareTrack"). Care for LBP was reviewed against 10 indicators used in a previous study and ratified by experts as representing appropriate LBP care in Australia during 2009 and 2010. RESULTS: Of the 22 CareTrack conditions, LBP had the highest number of eligible healthcare encounters (6588 of 35,573, 19%), 125 to 884 per indicator among 164 LBP patients. Overall compliance with LBP indicators was 72% (range 42%-98%). Allied health practitioners and hospitals were the most compliant (82%-83% respectively), followed by general practitioners (54%). Some aspects of care were poor, such as documenting a thorough neurological examination, screening for serious diseases such as infection and inappropriate use of drugs such as steroids and treatments such as traction. CONCLUSION: Over a quarter of LBP care was not appropriate despite the availability of guidelines. There is a need for national and, potentially, international agreement on clinical standards, indicators and tools to guide, document and monitor the appropriateness of care for LBP, and for measures to increase their uptake, particularly where deficiencies have been identified. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: N /A.


Subject(s)
Evidence-Based Medicine/methods , Low Back Pain/epidemiology , Low Back Pain/therapy , Patient Care/methods , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Australia/epidemiology , Evidence-Based Medicine/trends , Humans , Low Back Pain/diagnosis , Middle Aged , Patient Care/trends , Retrospective Studies , Rheumatologists/trends , Young Adult
5.
Int J Qual Health Care ; 28(6): 640-649, 2016 Dec 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-27664822

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: This study describes the use of, and modifications and additions made to, the Global Trigger Tool (GTT) since its first release in 2003, and summarizes its findings with respect to counting and characterizing adverse events (AEs). DATA SOURCES: Peer-reviewed literature up to 31st December 2014. STUDY SELECTION: A systematic review was conducted in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses statement. DATA EXTRACTION: Two authors extracted and compiled the demographics, methodologies and results of the selected studies. RESULTS OF DATA SYNTHESIS: Of the 48 studies meeting the eligibility criteria, 44 collected data from inpatient medical records and four from general practice records. Studies were undertaken in 16 countries. Over half did not follow the standard GTT protocol regarding the number of reviewers used. 'Acts of omission' were included in one quarter of studies. Incident reporting detected between 2% and 8% of AEs that were detected with the GTT. Rates of AEs varied in general inpatient studies between 7% and 40%. Infections, problems with surgical procedures and medication were the most common incident types. CONCLUSION: The GTT is a flexible tool used in a range of settings with varied applications. Substantial differences in AE rates were evident across studies, most likely associated with methodological differences and disparate reviewer interpretations. AE rates should not be compared between institutions or studies. Recommendations include adding 'omission' AEs, using preventability scores for priority setting, and re-framing the GTT's purpose to understand and characterize AEs rather than just counting them.


Subject(s)
Adverse Drug Reaction Reporting Systems/organization & administration , Medical Errors/prevention & control , Patient Safety/standards , Drug-Related Side Effects and Adverse Reactions/prevention & control , General Practice/standards , Humans , Inpatients
6.
BMJ Open ; 6(3): e008618, 2016 Mar 09.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-26962033

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: The prevention and management of venous thromboembolism (VTE) is often at variance with guidelines. The CareTrack Australia (CTA) study reported that appropriate care (in line with evidence-based or consensus-based guidelines) is being provided for VTE at just over half of eligible encounters. The aim of this paper is to present and discuss the detailed CTA findings for VTE as a baseline for compliance with guidelines at a population level. SETTING: The setting was 27 hospitals in 2 states of Australia. PARTICIPANTS: A sample of participants designed to be representative of the Australian population was recruited. Participants who had been admitted overnight during 2009 and/or 2010 were eligible. Of the 1154 CTA participants, 481(42%) were admitted overnight to hospital at least once, comprising 751 admissions. There were 279 females (58%), and the mean age was 64 years. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary measure was compliance with indicators of appropriate care for VTE. The indicators were extracted from Australian VTE clinical practice guidelines and ratified by experts. Participants' medical records from 2009 to 2010 were analysed for compliance with 38 VTE indicators. RESULTS: Of the 35,145 CTA encounters, 1078 (3%) were eligible for scoring against VTE indicators. There were 2-84 eligible encounters per indicator at 27 hospitals. Overall compliance with indicators for VTE was 51%, and ranged from 34% to 64% for aggregated sets of indicators. CONCLUSIONS: The prevention and management of VTE was appropriate for only half of the at-risk patients in our sample; this provides a baseline for tracking progress nationally. There is a need for national and, ideally, international agreement on clinical standards, indicators and tools to guide, document and monitor care for VTE, and for measures to increase their uptake, particularly where deficiencies have been identified.


Subject(s)
Disease Management , Guideline Adherence/standards , Hospitalization/statistics & numerical data , Medical Records/standards , Venous Thromboembolism/prevention & control , Venous Thromboembolism/therapy , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , Australia/epidemiology , Cross-Sectional Studies , Female , Hospitals , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Young Adult
7.
BMJ Open ; 5(4): e007749, 2015 Apr 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-25854977

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Australian and international clinical practice guidelines are available for common paediatric conditions. Yet there is evidence that there are substantial variations between the guidelines, recommendations (appropriate care) and the care delivered. This paper describes a study protocol to determine the appropriateness of the healthcare delivered to Australian children for 16 common paediatric conditions in acute and primary healthcare settings. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: A random sample of 6000-8000 medical records representing a cross-section of the Australian paediatric population will be reviewed for appropriateness of care against a set of indicators within three Australian states (New South Wales, Queensland and South Australia) using multistage, stratified sampling. Medical records of children aged <16 years who presented with at least one of the study conditions during 2012 and 2013 will be reviewed. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Human Research Ethics Committee approvals have been received from the Sydney Children's Hospital Network, Children's Health Queensland Hospital and Health Service and Women's and Children's Hospital Network (South Australia). An application is under review for the Royal Australian College of General Practitioners. The authors will submit the results of the study to relevant journals and offer oral presentations to researchers, clinicians and policymakers at national and international conferences.


Subject(s)
Child Health Services/standards , Guideline Adherence , Pediatrics/standards , Practice Patterns, Physicians'/standards , Quality Assurance, Health Care , Adolescent , Australia , Child , Child, Preschool , Clinical Protocols , Humans , Infant , Infant, Newborn , Medical Records , Quality Indicators, Health Care , Retrospective Studies
8.
BMJ Open ; 5(4): e007748, 2015 Apr 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-25854976

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Despite the widespread availability of clinical guidelines, considerable gaps remain between the care that is recommended (appropriate care) and the care provided. This protocol describes a research methodology to develop clinical indicators for appropriate care for common paediatric conditions. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We will identify conditions amenable to population-level appropriateness of care research and develop clinical indicators for each condition. Candidate conditions have been identified from published research; burden of disease, prevalence and frequency of presentation data; and quality of care priority lists. Clinical indicators will be developed through searches of national and international guidelines, and formatted with explicit criteria for inclusion, exclusion, time frame and setting. Experts will review the indicators using a wiki-based approach and modified Delphi process. A formative evaluation of the wiki process will be undertaken. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Human Research Ethics Committee approvals have been received from Sydney Children's Hospital Network, Children's Health Queensland Hospital and Health Service, and the Women's and Children's Health Network (South Australia). Applications are under review with Macquarie University and the Royal Australian College of General Practitioners. We will submit the results of the study to relevant journals and offer national and international presentations.


Subject(s)
Child Health Services/standards , Pediatrics/standards , Quality Assurance, Health Care/methods , Quality Indicators, Health Care , Adolescent , Australia , Child , Child, Preschool , Clinical Protocols , Humans , Infant , Infant, Newborn
9.
BMJ Open ; 5(4): e007750, 2015 Apr 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-25854978

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: A high-quality health system should deliver care that is free from harm. Few large-scale studies of adverse events have been undertaken in children's healthcare internationally, and none in Australia. The aim of this study is to measure the frequency and types of adverse events encountered in Australian paediatric care in a range of healthcare settings. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: A form of retrospective medical record review, the Institute of Healthcare Improvement's Global Trigger Tool, will be modified to collect data. Records of children aged <16 years managed during 2012 and 2013 will be reviewed. We aim to review 6000-8000 records from a sample of healthcare practices (hospitals, general practices and specialists). ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Human Research Ethics Committee approvals have been received from the Sydney Children's Hospital Network, Children's Health Queensland Hospital and Health Service, and the Women's and Children's Hospital Network in South Australia. An application is under review with the Royal Australian College of General Practitioners. The authors will submit the results of the study to relevant journals and undertake national and international oral presentations to researchers, clinicians and policymakers.


Subject(s)
Child Health Services/standards , Medical Errors , Patient Safety , Quality Assurance, Health Care , Quality Indicators, Health Care , Adolescent , Australia , Child , Child, Preschool , Clinical Protocols , Humans , Infant , Infant, Newborn , Medical Errors/prevention & control , Medical Records , Retrospective Studies
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...