Dataset Information

X?+?Y?=?Time for QI: Meaningful Engagement of Residents in Quality Improvement During the Ambulatory Block.

ABSTRACT:

Background?

Meaningful resident engagement in quality improvement (QI) remains challenging. Barriers include a lack of time and of faculty with QI expertise. We leveraged our internal medicine (IM) residency program's adoption of an "X" (inpatient rotations) plus "Y" (ambulatory block) schedule to implement a QI curriculum for all residents during their ambulatory block.

Objective?

We sought to engage residents in interprofessional QI, improve residents' QI confidence and knowledge and application to practice, and create opportunities for QI scholarship.

Methods?

In July 2015, the program provided dedicated time for QI in the ambulatory block. All categorical IM residents and 11 voluntary faculty mentors were divided into 10 teams based on clinic site and "Y" block schedule. Teams participated in resident-led, interprofessional ambulatory QI projects. Resident QI knowledge and confidence were assessed before the curriculum and 11 months after using the Quality Improvement Knowledge Application Tool-Revised (QIKAT-R) and surveys. QI project implementation and scholarship were tracked.

Results?

All categorical residents (N?=?81) participated. Residents reported increased confidence in all QI skills, and they demonstrated increased knowledge, with mean QIKAT-R paired scores improving from 15.8?±?4.6 to 19.1?±?5.9 (n?=?45 pairs, P?Conclusions?This ongoing curriculum engaged IM and IM-psychiatry residents in QI during their ambulatory block using volunteer clinic faculty mentors. Residents demonstrated improved QI confidence and knowledge. The majority of resident projects were sustained and generated scholarship.

SUBMITTER: Johnson KM

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6008036 | biostudies-literature | 2018 Jun

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

X + Y = Time for QI: Meaningful Engagement of Residents in Quality Improvement During the Ambulatory Block.

Johnson Krista M KM Fiordellisi Wendy W Kuperman Ethan E Wickersham Alexis A Kuehn Carly C Kamath Aparna A Szot Joseph J Suneja Manish M

Journal of graduate medical education 20180601 3

<h4>Background</h4>Meaningful resident engagement in quality improvement (QI) remains challenging. Barriers include a lack of time and of faculty with QI expertise. We leveraged our internal medicine (IM) residency program's adoption of an "X" (inpatient rotations) plus "Y" (ambulatory block) schedule to implement a QI curriculum for all residents during their ambulatory block.<h4>Objective</h4>We sought to engage residents in interprofessional QI, improve residents' QI confidence and knowledge ...[more]

PMID: 29946390

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectiveValid, reliable critical appraisal tools advance quality improvement (QI) intervention impacts by helping stakeholders identify higher quality studies. QI approaches are diverse and differ from clinical interventions. Widely used critical appraisal instruments do not take unique QI features into account and existing QI tools (eg, Standards for QI Reporting Excellence) are intended for publication guidance rather than critical appraisal. This study developed and psychometrically tested a critical appraisal instrument, the QI Minimum Quality Criteria Set (QI-MQCS) for assessing QI-specific features of QI publications.MethodsApproaches to developing the tool and ensuring validity included a literature review, in-person and online survey expert panel input, and application to empirical examples. We investigated psychometric properties in a set of diverse QI publications (N=54) by analysing reliability measures and item endorsement rates and explored sources of disagreement between reviewers.ResultsThe QI-MQCS includes 16 content domains to evaluate QI intervention publications: Organisational Motivation, Intervention Rationale, Intervention Description, Organisational Characteristics, Implementation, Study Design, Comparator Description, Data Sources, Timing, Adherence/Fidelity, Health Outcomes, Organisational Readiness, Penetration/Reach, Sustainability, Spread and Limitations. Median inter-rater agreement for QI-MQCS items was κ 0.57 (83% agreement). Item statistics indicated sufficient ability to differentiate between publications (median quality criteria met 67%). Internal consistency measures indicated coherence without excessive conceptual overlap (absolute mean interitem correlation=0.19). The critical appraisal instrument is accompanied by a user manual detailing What to consider, Where to look and How to rate.ConclusionsWe developed a ready-to-use, valid and reliable critical appraisal instrument applicable to healthcare QI intervention publications, but recognise scope for continuing refinement.

Project description:BackgroundEngaging residents in meaningful quality improvement (QI) is difficult. Challenges include competing demands, didactics which lack connection to meaningful work, suboptimal experiential learning, unclear accountability, absence of timely and relevant data, and lack of faculty coaches and role models. Various strategies to address these challenges for engagement have been described, but not as a unified approach. This paper describes a bundle of practical strategies to address common challenges to resident engagement in QI, illustrated through the experience of one residency education program.Methods62 categorical residents in the University of Missouri Internal Medicine residency participated in a longitudinal QI curriculum integrated into residency clinic assignments with dedicated QI work sessions and brief just-in-time didactics with mentorship from faculty coaches. Residents completed at least two PDSA (Plan-Do-Study-Act) cycles for their projects. The experience included clear expectations and tools for accountability. Project criteria included importance to patients, residents, and the institution. Residents had access to data related to their own practice. A pre-post survey asked residents to self-assess their level of interest and engagement in QI on a 5-point Likert scale, with 1 = least desired and 5 = most desired result. Data were analyzed by paired t-test.ResultsAll 62 residents participated in the program as members of ten QI teams. 40/62 residents completed both pre- and post-surveys. Items related to self-assessment of QI in clinical work all changed in the desired direction: likelihood of participation (3.7 to 4.1, p = 0.03), frequency of QI use (3.3 to 3.9, p = 0.001), and opinion about using QI in clinical work (3.9 to 4.0, p = 0.21). Resident assessment of QI priority in clinical work did not change.ConclusionsWe implemented a practical strategies bundle to overcome common challenges to successfully engaging residents in clinical quality improvement. These strategies included QI work integrated into routine clinical assignments, just-in-time didactics, experiential learning with clear expectations and strategic project selection, timely and pertinent data from the residents' own practice, and real-time faculty coaching.