Achieving Consensus Among Stakeholders Using the Nominal Group Technique: A Perinatal Quality Collaborative Approach.

IF 1.2 4区医学 Q4 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES

Quality Management in Health Care Pub Date : 2023-07-01 Epub Date: 2022-08-24 DOI:10.1097/QMH.0000000000000384

Matthew D Moore, Allyson G Hall, Martha S Wingate, Eric W Ford

{"title":"Achieving Consensus Among Stakeholders Using the Nominal Group Technique: A Perinatal Quality Collaborative Approach.","authors":"Matthew D Moore, Allyson G Hall, Martha S Wingate, Eric W Ford","doi":"10.1097/QMH.0000000000000384","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background and objectives: Public health systems exhibiting strong connections across the workforce experience substantial population health improvements. This is especially important for improving quality and achieving value among vulnerable populations such as mothers and infants. The purpose of this research was to demonstrate how Alabama's newly formed perinatal quality collaborative (Alabama Perinatal Quality Collaborative [ALPQC]) used evidenced-based processes to achieve consensus in identifying population quality improvement (QI) initiatives.Methods: This multiphase quantitative and qualitative study engaged stakeholders (n = 44) at the ALPQC annual meeting. Maternal and neonatal focused QI project topics were identified and catalogued from active perinatal quality collaborative websites. The Delphi method and the nominal group technique (NGT) were used to prioritize topics using selected criteria ( impact , enthusiasm , alignment , and feasibility ) and stakeholder input.Results: Using the Delphi method, 11 of 27 identified project topics met inclusion criteria for stakeholder consideration. Employing the NGT, maternal projects received more total votes (n = 535) than neonatal projects (n = 313). Standard deviations were higher for neonatal projects (SD: feasibility = 10.9, alignment = 17.9, enthusiasm = 19.2, and impact = 22.1) than for maternal projects (SD: alignment = 5.9, enthusiasm = 7.3, impact = 7.9, and feasibility = 11.1). Hypertension in pregnancy (n = 117) and neonatal abstinence syndrome (n = 177) achieved the most votes total and for impact (n = 35 and n = 54, respectively) but variable support for feasibility .Conclusions: Together, these techniques achieved valid consensus across multidisciplinary stakeholders in alignment with state public health priorities. This model can be used in other settings to integrate stakeholder input and enhance the value of a common population QI agenda.","PeriodicalId":20986,"journal":{"name":"Quality Management in Health Care","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9950289/pdf/","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Quality Management in Health Care","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/QMH.0000000000000384","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2022/8/24 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 1

Abstract

Background and objectives: Public health systems exhibiting strong connections across the workforce experience substantial population health improvements. This is especially important for improving quality and achieving value among vulnerable populations such as mothers and infants. The purpose of this research was to demonstrate how Alabama's newly formed perinatal quality collaborative (Alabama Perinatal Quality Collaborative [ALPQC]) used evidenced-based processes to achieve consensus in identifying population quality improvement (QI) initiatives.

Methods: This multiphase quantitative and qualitative study engaged stakeholders (n = 44) at the ALPQC annual meeting. Maternal and neonatal focused QI project topics were identified and catalogued from active perinatal quality collaborative websites. The Delphi method and the nominal group technique (NGT) were used to prioritize topics using selected criteria ( impact , enthusiasm , alignment , and feasibility ) and stakeholder input.

Results: Using the Delphi method, 11 of 27 identified project topics met inclusion criteria for stakeholder consideration. Employing the NGT, maternal projects received more total votes (n = 535) than neonatal projects (n = 313). Standard deviations were higher for neonatal projects (SD: feasibility = 10.9, alignment = 17.9, enthusiasm = 19.2, and impact = 22.1) than for maternal projects (SD: alignment = 5.9, enthusiasm = 7.3, impact = 7.9, and feasibility = 11.1). Hypertension in pregnancy (n = 117) and neonatal abstinence syndrome (n = 177) achieved the most votes total and for impact (n = 35 and n = 54, respectively) but variable support for feasibility .

Conclusions: Together, these techniques achieved valid consensus across multidisciplinary stakeholders in alignment with state public health priorities. This model can be used in other settings to integrate stakeholder input and enhance the value of a common population QI agenda.

查看原文本刊更多论文

使用名义小组技术在利益相关者中达成共识：围产期质量协作方法。

背景和目标：公共卫生系统在劳动力中表现出强大的联系，人口健康状况得到了显著改善。这对于提高母亲和婴儿等弱势群体的质量和实现价值尤为重要。本研究的目的是展示阿拉巴马州新成立的围产期质量协作组织（阿拉巴马州围产期质量合作组织[ALPQC]）如何使用基于证据的流程，在确定人口质量改善（QI）举措方面达成共识。方法：这项多阶段的定量和定性研究让利益相关者（n=44）参加了ALPQC年会。从活跃的围产期质量合作网站上确定并编目了以孕产妇和新生儿为重点的QI项目主题。使用德尔菲方法和名义小组技术（NGT），使用选定的标准（影响力、积极性、一致性和可行性）和利益相关者的投入，对主题进行优先排序。结果：使用德尔菲方法，27个确定的项目主题中有11个符合利益相关者考虑的纳入标准。使用NGT，产妇项目获得的总票数（n=535）高于新生儿项目（n=313）。新生儿项目的标准差（SD:可行性=10.9，一致性=17.9，积极性=19.2，影响=22.1）高于母体项目（SD:一致性=5.9，积极性=7.3，影响=7.9，影响=11.1）。妊娠期高血压（n=117）和新生儿禁欲综合征（n=177）获得了最多的选票（分别为n=35和n=54）但对可行性的支持各不相同。结论：这些技术共同在多学科利益相关者中达成了有效的共识，符合州公共卫生优先事项。该模型可用于其他环境，以整合利益相关者的投入，并提高普通人群QI议程的价值。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Quality Management in Health Care HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES-

CiteScore

1.90

自引率

8.30%

发文量

108

期刊介绍： Quality Management in Health Care (QMHC) is a peer-reviewed journal that provides a forum for our readers to explore the theoretical, technical, and strategic elements of health care quality management. The journal''s primary focus is on organizational structure and processes as these affect the quality of care and patient outcomes. In particular, it: -Builds knowledge about the application of statistical tools, control charts, benchmarking, and other devices used in the ongoing monitoring and evaluation of care and of patient outcomes; -Encourages research in and evaluation of the results of various organizational strategies designed to bring about quantifiable improvements in patient outcomes; -Fosters the application of quality management science to patient care processes and clinical decision-making; -Fosters cooperation and communication among health care providers, payers and regulators in their efforts to improve the quality of patient outcomes; -Explores links among the various clinical, technical, administrative, and managerial disciplines involved in patient care, as well as the role and responsibilities of organizational governance in ongoing quality management.