The global pool of simulation exercise materials in health emergency preparedness and response: a scoping review with a health system perspective.

Simulation Exercises (SimEx) are an established tool in defence and allied security sectors, applied extensively in health security initiatives under national or international legislative requirements, particularly the International Health Regulations (2005). There is, however, a paucity of information on SimEx application to test the functionality of health systems alongside emergency preparedness, response and recovery. Given the important implications health services resilience has for the protection and improvement of human life, this scoping review was undertaken to determine how the publicly available body of existing global SimEx materials considers health systems, together with health security functions in the event of disruptive emergencies. The global review identified 668 articles from literature and 73 products from institutional sources. Relevant screening identified 51 materials suitable to examine from a health system lens using the six health system building blocks as per the WHO Health System Framework. Eight materials were identified for further examination of their ability to test health system functionality from a resilience perspective. SimEx are an effective approach used extensively within health security and emergency response sectors but is not yet adequately used to test health system resilience. Currently available SimEx materials lack an integrated health system perspective and have a limited focus on the quality of services delivered within the context of response to a public health emergency. The materials do not focus on the ability of systems to effectively maintain core services during response. Without adjustment of the scope and focus, currently available SimEx materials do not have the capacity to test health systems to support the development of resilient health systems. Dedicated SimEx materials are urgently needed to fill this gap and harness their potential as an operational tool to contribute to improvements in health systems. They can act as effective global goods to allow testing of different functional aspects of health systems and service delivery alongside emergency preparedness and response. The work was conducted within the scope of the Tackling Deadly Diseases in Africa Programme, funded by the UK Department for International Development, which seeks to strengthen collaboration between the health system and health security clusters to promote health security and build resilient health systems.

Quality of Health Care for Children in Australia, 2012-2013.

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.

The Catalonia WHO Demonstration Project of Palliative Care: Results at 25 Years (1990-2015).

In 2015, the World Health Organization (WHO) Demonstration Project on Palliative Care in Catalonia (Spain) celebrated its 25th anniversary. The present report describes the achievements and progress made through this project. Numerous innovations have been made with regard to the palliative care (PC) model, organization, and policy. As the concept of PC has expanded to include individuals with advanced chronic conditions, new needs in diverse domains have been identified. The WHO resolution on "Strengthening of palliative care as a component of comprehensive care throughout the life course," together with other related WHO initiatives, support the development of a person-centered integrated care PC model with universal coverage. The Catalan Department of Health, together with key institutions, developed a new program in the year 2011 to promote comprehensive and integrated PC approach strategies for individuals with advanced chronic conditions. The program included epidemiologic research to describe the population with progressive and life-limiting illnesses. One key outcome was the development of a specific tool (NECPAL CCOMS-ICO(©)) to identify individuals in the community in need of PC. Other innovations to emerge from this project to improve PC provision include the development of the essential needs approach and integrated models across care settings. Several educational and research programs have been undertaken to complement the process. These results illustrate how a PC program can respond and adapt to emerging needs and demands. The success of the PC approach described here supports more widespread adoption by other key care programs, particularly chronic care programs.

Health, spending and the effort to improve quality in OECD countries: a review of the data.

The performance of health systems is of concern to both policy-makers and academics and a large body of recent literature has advanced the debate significantly on methods and results of health system performance assessments. In this article, I attempt to summarize what is known about a range of areas of health system performance, specifically in the areas of spending and outcomes, using data from the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) in the areas of health, spending, risk factors and quality of care. In so doing, we use new data from the OECD's Health Care Quality Indicators (HCQI) to examine a factor that is frequently cited at the national level but rarely compared at the international level, namely the quality of the healthcare provided. In keeping with other assessments of trends in health, we show that health has improved dramatically since the 1970s in all of the countries of the OECD. Likewise, all of the OECD countries are spending many times more on health per person than in 1970. However, the gains in health as well as the spending levels vary tremendously across countries. Quality of care is relatively high in some areas such as vaccination rates. In other areas such as breast cancer survival, the HCQI data show that most countries are making progress somewhat universally, but that all countries still have progress to be made. Finally, in other areas, such as inpatient care for acute myocardial infarction (AMI), there is wide variation in quality. Future work will need to be undertaken in order to examine possible best practices at the policy and operational level of health care delivery, their impact on spending and, most importantly, on health outcomes.

How the national healthcare quality and disparities reports can catalyze quality improvement.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of the National Reports on Healthcare Quality and Disparities is to enhance awareness of quality and health care disparities, track progress, understand variations, and catalyze improvements in health care. OBJECTIVES: The objective of this paper is to propose a model that will facilitate a user's progression from knowledge to action and to show how the reports, its data warehouse, associated products, and Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality resources are integrated and focused on a comprehensive campaign to improve health care quality. DESIGN: The design of the paper is to present a conceptual model and to show how implementation strategies for the reports fit the model. FINDINGS: The authors propose a quality improvement supply chain model to help elucidate the links of the process, corresponding developmental stages that potential users need to master and progress through, and "just-in-time" supply chain inputs at each of the corresponding stages, and populate the model with examples. CONCLUSION: The traditional ways of disseminating knowledge derived from science through reports and conferences are inadequate to the humbling need for vast improvements in the US health care system. Our model suggests the need for a wide variety of information, packaged in a diverse ways, and delivered just in time and on demand. It encourages the alignment of decision makers and researchers, along with information intermediaries and innovation brokers, to make the information production cycle more efficient and effective. Future iterations of the reports will improve relevance, meaning, and distribution of information to facilitate its uptake by potential users.

The national healthcare quality and disparities reports: an overview.

BACKGROUND: Congress directed the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) to lead an effort for the US Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) to develop 2 annual reports: a National Healthcare Quality Report (NHQR) and a National Healthcare Disparities Report (NHDR). OBJECTIVES: This article lays out key concepts, definitions, statistical methods, and findings from these first ever national reports on quality and disparities. We also summarize some possible future directions for the reports. RESEARCH DESIGN: The NHQR and NHDR rely on secondary analysis of available data from over 40 established, national databases. The NHQR presents data at the national level, by sociodemographic characteristics, and at the state level. The NHDR presents data broken out by race/ethnicity and by socioeconomic status. MEASURES: The 2003 NHQR presented data on approximately 140 quality measures and the NHDR presented data on these same measures plus approximately 100 measures of access to care. RESULTS: The reports found that high healthcare quality is not a given and that disparities are pervasive throughout the US healthcare system. In addition, they found the quality and disparities issues are particularly apparent in preventive care, but that greater improvement is possible. CONCLUSIONS: As these reports evolve for the 2004 version and beyond, they will be a vital step in the effort to improve healthcare quality for all populations in the United States.

Assessing patient safety in the United States: challenges and opportunities.

BACKGROUND: In 1999, the US Congress mandated the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ), Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS), to report annually to the nation about healthcare quality. One chapter in the National Healthcare Quality Report (NHQR) is focused on patient safety. OBJECTIVES: The objectives of this study were to describe the challenges in reporting the national status on patient safety for the first NHQR and discuss emerging opportunities to improve the comprehensiveness and reliability of future reporting. RESEARCH DESIGN: This study is a selective review of definitions, frameworks, data sources, measures, and emerging developments for assessing patient safety in the United States. RESULTS: Available data and measures for patient safety assessment in the nation are inadequate, especially for comparing regions and subpopulations and for trend analysis. However, many opportunities are emerging from the recently increased investments in patient safety research and many ongoing safety improvement efforts in the private sector and at the federal, state, and local government levels. CONCLUSION: There are many challenges in assessing national performance on patient safety today. Ongoing developments on multiple fronts will provide data and measures for more accurate and more comprehensive assessments of patient safety for future NHQRs.

Children's Health Care in the First National Healthcare Quality Report and National Healthcare Disparities Report.

BACKGROUND: The first National Healthcare Quality Report (NHQR) and National Healthcare Disparities Report (NHDR) are landmark events for children's health care quality and are expected to stimulate local measurement, benchmarking, and quality improvement efforts. METHOD: The authors select findings from the NHQR and NHDR, focusing on topics reflecting a range of health care and health care settings affecting children. They highlight disparities by race/ethnicity, socioeconomic status, and insurance source. They critique the first NHQR and NHDR from a child health perspective. SELECT NHQR/DR FINDINGS: Quality-of-care issues in the effectiveness domain were identified for black infant mortality, low and very low birth weight rates, antibiotic use for the common cold, and childhood hospitalizations for asthma. Immunization rates have improved. Patient centeredness and timeliness results vary by race, ethnicity and income. The NHDR found that Hispanic and low-income children are most likely to be uninsured for part of the year. Groups of children most likely to have public coverage are American Indian/Alaska native, black, and Hispanic. CRITIQUE OF REPORTS: The structure and criteria used for the first reports limit their usefulness from a child health perspective. A basic problem is that the conceptualizations of health and health care that are driving national initiatives on quality are based largely on an adult chronic care model focused on conditions with high expenditures as treated in the mainstream health care delivery system. CONCLUSION: NHQR and NHDR provide essential information on children's health care quality. Future reports can be improved by including child-relevant perspectives in priority-setting and data-gathering efforts.

The evaluation of quality assurance: developing and testing practical methods for managers.

OBJECTIVE OF THE STUDY: To develop an approach for evaluating quality assurance (QA) activities and programs in health care settings and to test different evaluation methods. DESIGN: This was not a formal scientific study, but rather a research and development (R&D) study, which followed the following steps: (1) reviewing the literature; (2) clarifying critical issues for all key aspects of QA activities; (3) drafting a guide to provide a flexible vehicle for different approaches; (4) testing and adapting the guide as it evolved in three countries; and (5) testing two evaluation tools (self-assessment and appreciative evaluation) in Chile. SETTING AND STUDY PARTICIPANTS: The evaluation guide was tested by evaluating QA structures, activities, and programs at the country, regional, and facility levels in Zambia, Niger, and Chile. RESULTS: The study resulted in an evaluation guide, which includes an implementation outline, an evaluation matrix, and an appendix of evaluation tools and methods. The guide helps evaluators: agree on a proposed evaluation's scope and design; develop an evaluation methods plan; and address QA history, advocacy, culture, and structure, as well as QA activities and accomplishments. Specific results of the country evaluations in Zambia, Niger, and Chile are presented in separate articles in this supplement. CONCLUSION: The QA programs in which the evaluation guide was tested differed in many ways, such as health system structure, decision to focus on particular services, political level implementing QA, policy environment, leadership, and program evolution. The implementation guide presents an outline of the key implementation steps for an evaluation, and includes checklists and model forms (e.g. sample agenda for a team planning meeting, sample list of questions to focus the evaluation). The evaluation matrix presents indicators by QA component and key question, and it enables evaluators to build an approach and select methods. The appendix describes the various tools and methods presented in the first two sections of the evaluation guide.