A new framework for quality partnerships in Children's Hospitals.

Children's hospitals and their affiliated departments of pediatrics often pursue separate programs in quality and safety; by integrating these programs, they can accelerate progress. Hospital executives and pediatric department chairs from 14 children's hospitals have been exploring practical approaches for integrating quality programs. Three components provide focus: (1) alignment of quality priorities and resources across the organizations; (2) education and training for physicians in the science of improvement; and (3) professional development and career progression for physicians in recognition of quality-improvement activities. Process and resource requirements are identified for each component, and specific, actionable steps are identified. The action steps are arrayed on a continuum from basic to advanced integration. The resulting matrix serves as an "integration framework," useful to a hospital and its pediatric academic department at any stage of integration for assessing its current state, plotting a path toward further integration, tracking its progress, and identifying potential collaborators and models of advanced integration. The framework contributes to health care's quality-improvement movement in multiple ways: it addresses a basic impediment to quality and safety improvement; it is an implementable model for integrating quality programs; it offers career-advancement potential for physicians interested in quality; it helps optimize investments in quality and safety; and it can be applied both within a single children's hospital and across multiple children's hospitals. Widespread adoption of the integration framework could have a transformative effect on the children's hospital sector, not the least of which is improved quality and safety on a large scale.

Utilizing peer academic detailing to improve childhood immunization coverage levels.

Interventions that utilize academic detailing to improve childhood immunization have been implemented across the country. This study evaluates the effectiveness of an academic detailing intervention to increase childhood immunization rates in pediatric and family medicine practices in a major metropolitan area. Educational teams of one physician, nurse, and office manager delivered 83 peer education sessions at practices in the intervention group. Postintervention immunization rates for children 12-23 months of age increased 1% in the intervention group and decreased 3% in the control group. Postintervention coverage levels for children 12-23 months of age did not differ between the intervention and control groups. Results indicated this office-based intervention was not sufficient to effect measurable changes in immunization coverage levels after 1 year of participation. Future interventions need to provide initial feedback regarding practice immunization coverage levels prior to the educational interventions and include multiple encounters.

Improvement in provider immunization knowledge and behaviors following a peer education intervention.

Provider education programs that use academic detailing to improve childhood immunization have been implemented in several states. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the impact of these types of programs to improve immunization-related behaviors in private provider offices. The intervention included peer-based academic detailing in which teams of 1 physician, 1 nurse, and 1 office manager visited pediatric and family practices to deliver an educational presentation and develop practice-specific action plans. Comparison of pre-post intervention surveys showed that providers' willingness to give the maximum number of immunizations due at 1 visit (P < .001) increased. More providers reported routinely screening immunization records at sickness or injury visits (P < .05) and using minimum intervals (P < .001) postintervention. Mean change in baseline and postintervention overall scores was significant for pediatric practices (0.40, P < .05), small practices (0.64, P < .01), Vaccines for Children (VFC) practices (0.74, P < .05), and non-VFC provider practices (0.67, P < .01) but not for family or large practices.