Dataset Information

Requirements for a Dashboard to Support Quality Improvement Teams in Pain Management

ABSTRACT: Pain management is often considered lower priority than many other aspects of health management in hospitals. However, there is potential for Quality Improvement (QI) teams to improve pain management by visualising and exploring pain data sets. Although dashboards are already used by QI teams in hospitals, there is limited evidence of teams accessing visualisations to support their decision making. This study aims to identify the needs of the QI team in a UK Critical Care Unit (CCU) and develop dashboards that visualise longitudinal data on the efficacy of patient pain management to assist the team in making informed decisions to improve pain management within the CCU. This research is based on an analysis of transcripts of interviews with healthcare professionals with a variety of roles in the CCU and their evaluation of probes. We identified two key uses of pain data: direct patient care (focusing on individual patient data) and QI (aggregating data across the CCU and over time); in this paper, we focus on the QI role. We have identified how CCU staff currently interpret information and determine what supplementary information can better inform their decision making and support sensemaking. From these, a set of data visualisations has been proposed, for integration with the hospital electronic health record. These visualisations are being iteratively refined in collaboration with CCU staff and technical staff responsible for maintaining the electronic health record. The paper presents user requirements for QI in pain management and a set of visualisations, including the design rationale behind the various methods proposed for visualising and exploring pain data using dashboards.

SUBMITTER: Opie J

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8567310 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundDashboards can support data-driven quality improvements in health care. They visualize data in ways intended to ease cognitive load and support data comprehension, but how they are best integrated into working practices needs further investigation.ObjectiveThis paper reports the findings of a realist evaluation of a web-based quality dashboard (QualDash) developed to support the use of national audit data in quality improvement.MethodsQualDash was co-designed with data users and installed in 8 clinical services (3 pediatric intensive care units and 5 cardiology services) across 5 health care organizations (sites A-E) in England between July and December 2019. Champions were identified to support adoption. Data to evaluate QualDash were collected between July 2019 and August 2021 and consisted of 148.5 hours of observations including hospital wards and clinical governance meetings, log files that captured the extent of use of QualDash over 12 months, and a questionnaire designed to assess the dashboard's perceived usefulness and ease of use. Guided by the principles of realist evaluation, data were analyzed to understand how, why, and in what circumstances QualDash supported the use of national audit data in quality improvement.ResultsThe observations revealed that variation across sites in the amount and type of resources available to support data use, alongside staff interactions with QualDash, shaped its use and impact. Sites resourced with skilled audit support staff and established reporting systems (sites A and C) continued to use existing processes to report data. A number of constraints influenced use of QualDash in these sites including that some dashboard metrics were not configured in line with user expectations and staff were not fully aware how QualDash could be used to facilitate their work. In less well-resourced services, QualDash automated parts of their reporting process, streamlining the work of audit support staff (site B), and, in some cases, highlighted issues with data completeness that the service worked to address (site E). Questionnaire responses received from 23 participants indicated that QualDash was perceived as useful and easy to use despite its variable use in practice.ConclusionsWeb-based dashboards have the potential to support data-driven improvement, providing access to visualizations that can help users address key questions about care quality. Findings from this study point to ways in which dashboard design might be improved to optimize use and impact in different contexts; this includes using data meaningful to stakeholders in the co-design process and actively engaging staff knowledgeable about current data use and routines in the scrutiny of the dashboard metrics and functions. In addition, consideration should be given to the processes of data collection and upload that underpin the quality of the data visualized and consequently its potential to stimulate quality improvement.International registered report identifier (irrid)RR2-10.1136/bmjopen-2019-033208.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Standard methods for obtaining data may delay quality improvement (QI) interventions including for bronchiolitis, a common cause of childhood hospitalization. OBJECTIVE:To describe the use of a dashboard in the context of a multifaceted QI intervention aimed at reducing the use of chest radiographs, bronchodilators, antibiotics, steroids, and viral testing in patients with bronchiolitis. METHODS:This QI initiative took place at Children's Minnesota, a large, not-for-profit children's health care organization. A multidisciplinary bronchiolitis workgroup developed a local clinical guideline and order-set. Delays in obtaining baseline data prompted a pediatric hospitalist and information technology specialist to modify a vendor's dashboard to display data related to bronchiolitis guideline metrics. Patients 2 months to 2 years old with a bronchiolitis emergency department (ED)/inpatient encounter in the period October 1, 2014 to April 30, 2018 were included. The primary outcome was a functioning dashboard; a process measure was the percentage of ED clinician logins. Outcome measures included the percent use of guideline metrics (e.g., bronchodilators) displayed on statistical process control charts (ED vs. inpatient). Balancing measures included length of stay, charge ratios, and hospital revisits. RESULTS:A workgroup (formed October 2015) implemented a bronchiolitis order-set and guideline (February 2016) followed by a bronchiolitis dashboard (August 2016) consolidating disparate data sources loaded within 2 to 4 days of discharge. In total, 35% of ED clinicians logged in. Leaders used the dashboard to target and track interventions such as a bronchodilator order alert. There were improvements in most outcome metrics; however, timing did not suggest direct dashboard impact. ED balancing measures were lower after implementation. CONCLUSION:We described use of a dashboard to support a multifaceted QI initiative for bronchiolitis. Leaders used the dashboard for targeted interventions but the dashboard did not directly impact the observed improvements. Future studies should assess reasons for low individual dashboard use.

Project description:BackgroundIndonesia has been shifting from ensuring access to health services towards improving service quality. Accreditation has been used as quality assurance (QA) mechanism, first in hospitals and subsequently in primary health care facilities, including Puskesmas (community health centres). QA provides measures of whether services meet quality targets, but quality improvement (QI) is needed to make change and achieve improvements. QI is a cyclical process with cycles of problem identification, solution testing and observation. We investigated the factors which influenced the process of QI based on experience of maternal health QI teams in three Puskesmas in Cianjur district, West Java province, Indonesia.MethodsQualitative data were collected using 28 in-depth interviews at two points of time: pre- (April 2016) and post- QI intervention (April 2017), involving national, provincial, district and Puskesmas managers; and Puskesmas QI team members. Thematic analysis of transcripts was conducted.ResultsWe found four main factors contributed to the process of QI: 1) leadership, including awareness and attitude of leader(s) towards QI, involvement of leader(s) in the QI process and decision-making in budget allocation for QI; 2) staff enthusiasm and multidisciplinary collaboration; 3) a culture where QI is integrated in existing responsibilities; and 4) the ongoing Puskesmas accreditation process, which increased the value of QI to the organisation.ConclusionMaking QI a success in the decentralised Indonesian system requires action at four levels. At individual level, leadership attributes can create an internal quality environment and drive organisational cultural change. At team level, staff enthusiasm and collaboration can be triggered through engaging and tasking everyone in the QI process and having a shared vision of what quality should look like. At organisational level, QI should be integrated in planned activities, ensuring financial and human resources. Lastly, QI can be encouraged when it is implemented by the wider health system as part of national accreditation programmes.

Dataset Information

Requirements for a Dashboard to Support Quality Improvement Teams in Pain Management

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets