提高医疗保健价值:明智地选择加拿大医院指定计划。

IF 2.3 4区 医学 Q1 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL
Daksh Datta MSc, Doreen Day MHSc, Christine Soong MD, MSc
{"title":"提高医疗保健价值:明智地选择加拿大医院指定计划。","authors":"Daksh Datta MSc,&nbsp;Doreen Day MHSc,&nbsp;Christine Soong MD, MSc","doi":"10.1002/jhm.13593","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Choosing Wisely is a campaign led by clinicians to reduce unnecessary resource use in healthcare. It began with a focus on raising awareness about the harms of overuse of unnecessary tests and treatments. Choosing Wisely Canada (CWC) has since been actively leading and guiding organizations in system-level implementation through education, advocacy, the creation of a community of practice, and national collaborative implementation programs. Like all quality improvement work, implementation efforts are more likely to be successful when supported by system-level enablers. Some enablers that have been studied include mandatory accreditation programs, financial incentives, and intrinsic motivators. Choosing Wisely Canada chose to incorporate key elements of intrinsic motivators in a program tailored to recognize its resource stewardship goals.</p><p>In many jurisdictions, quality improvement enablers take the form of mandatory accreditation programs such as Accreditation Canada and the Joint Commission in the United States, designed for hospitals to meet quality indicators. However, accreditation bodies tend to be designed in partnership with regulatory bodies with frameworks which are neither specific nor all relevant to Choosing Wisely recommendations.<span><sup>1</sup></span></p><p>Financial incentives for the purposes of improved sustainability and stewardship are also found in healthcare systems worldwide<span><sup>2, 3</sup></span> and have been shown to improve care in certain contexts.<span><sup>2-4</sup></span> However, there are criticisms levied towards stewardship programs structured around financial incentives and rewards,<span><sup>5</sup></span> including from physicians themselves.<span><sup>6, 7</sup></span> Many physicians may not feel that monetary incentives would motivate them to change practice patterns and feel they would increase discomfort or cause backlash from patients.<span><sup>7</sup></span> They may prefer intrinsic motivation driven by peer perception, professional pride, and reputation. Intrinsic motivation is a well-studied behavioral factor related to the core human drive to feel competent and effective in order to maintain some control on causality in their surroundings.<span><sup>8</sup></span> Whereas financial motivations and one-time payments diminish in effect over longer periods of time,<span><sup>9-11</sup></span> intrinsic motivators may sustain long-term and promote behavioral changes.<span><sup>7, 12</sup></span> Unlike financial incentives, these motivators also address the issue of dual agency: the perception that physicians place financial factors above their patients' interests. This approach builds trust by having conversations and discussions with experts rather than decreeing absolute policy changes, and produces learning networks to disseminate information, engage partners, and implement new approaches to healthcare, all of which are indicators of a reliable, competent, and sustainable program.<span><sup>6</sup></span> Further studies are necessary to properly evaluate the relationship between stewardship program efficacy and interventions developed with behavior change theory principles,<span><sup>13</sup></span> but common practices shown to be promising include peer reputation, electronic medical record support, individualized overuse data, and expert discussions and forums.<span><sup>7</sup></span></p><p>Accreditation programs designed in collaboration with the government or other regulatory bodies have also been studied extensively, with varying degrees of success in implementation and outcomes, dependent on multiple parameters of each program.<span><sup>14</sup></span> They can improve patient safety and reduce medical error rates while enhancing staff proficiency and organizational transparency.<span><sup>15-17</sup></span> However, large-scale mandatory programs have also been perceived as bureaucratic, with more paperwork and other time-consuming tasks that take away time from clinical work, negatively impacting employee performance and subsequently patient care.<span><sup>18, 19</sup></span> Thus, while accreditation programs can benefit healthcare delivery, the degree to which this is achieved is highly dependent on the approach, implementation, and goals of the governing organization.</p><p>The Choosing Wisely Canada Hospital Designation Program was created by combining strengths of established frameworks. It leverages the spirit of the Choosing Wisely Campaign, which started as a grass-roots initiative driven by professional societies to create lists relevant to their speciality to reduce low-value care. Healthcare professionals not only created lists of low-value targets but also began implementing the recommendations across hospitals. Because HDP is a voluntary program, it uses intrinsic motivators of clinicians who are committed to a bottom-up approach to high-value care. In the following section, we describe the Hospital Designation Program and early learnings which may be useful in creating similar programs in other jurisdictions.</p><p>In 2019, in recognition of outstanding commitment to high-value care, Choosing Wisely Canada created a Hospital Designation Program (HDP) that seeks to elevate the status of hospitals successfully implementing CWC recommendations with a certificate of designation and broad-reaching public acknowledgment. The appeal of the Hospital Designation Program is that it is driven by clinicians based on intrinsic motivations. The program was conceived and designed with input from stakeholders from CWC, the hospital sector, and professional societies.</p><p>In Phase 1 of the HDP, three levels of designation were offered, with Level 3 corresponding to the highest level of commitment and demonstrated improvement, including embedding a commitment to CWC into the hospital's strategic plans and mentorship of peer hospital(s) in their Choosing Wisely implementation. The HDP requirements for each level and designated hospital characteristics are described in Table 1. Level 1 designated hospitals must demonstrate successful implementation of 5 “easy wins,” system-level interventions that are simple to implement such as removing the ability to order folate testing. Level 3 designated hospitals must demonstrate successful implementation of at least 7 CWC recommendations in all or many clinical areas. The program has received national interest, with 64 hospitals designated in Phase 1, and is an effective strategy to engage clinicians in resource stewardship.</p><p>As the program matured, it was re-launched as Phase 2 in 2022 with a simplified 2-level designation process of “Quality Improvement” and “Leadership” status. Hospitals designated as Phase 1 hospitals continued to maintain their prior designation but were also eligible to transfer their designation to a Phase 2 status hospital. Hospitals seeking designation for the first time can only apply to a Phase 2 status (QI or Leadership). One reason for the new program, while still requiring the implementation of Choosing Wisely recommendations, is to focus on sustainability of results, which was not a requirement of Phase 1 hospitals. Hospitals in both the Quality Improvement and Leadership levels must demonstrate their intention to sustain Choosing Wisely efforts in the years following designation through regular submission of outcomes data. Requirements for the new program are described in Table 2. Since the re-launch in Phase 2, 25 out of the 64 hospitals designated in Phase 1 have been approved for new designations under either QI or Leadership Status and one new hospital has achieved a Phase 2 designation, bringing the total number of hospital designations achieved to 90.</p><p>Key success factors of the program demonstrating positive change include a clinician-driven, bottom-up approach, emphasis on measurable outcome data using improvement science methods, and high-profile recognition attained with designation in public and healthcare fora. Many designated hospitals describe strong clinician-led approaches to reducing unnecessary care, supported by organizational leadership. This bottom-up approach encouraged clinician engagement which aligned with hospitals' mandated goals of demonstrating system improvement. Hospitals were eager to provide quality improvement supports (e.g., data extraction and analysis, access to improvement specialists, etc.). Support offered by CWC included targeted educational webinars about the program and showcasing success stories from across the country. CWC provided opportunities to meet one-on-one with the hospital's implementation teams for any questions or issues that arose, connected hospitals with regional CWC offices to navigate local issues, and matched applicants to other similar hospitals (in size, location, population served, etc.) for informal mentorship. Through these supports, hospitals gained insight from experts on successful quality improvement implementation.</p><p>The CWC recommendations are a facilitator for hospitals looking to undertake QI projects, and we find that hospitals take pride in attaining recognition for their achievements, especially when compared to peer hospitals. Designated hospital leaders indicate that the program is a win-win for their hospitals: demonstrating improved patient care with the creditability of implementing evidence-based CWC recommendations, while receiving national recognition via the Hospital Designation Program.</p><p>The designation process requires peer-reviewed applications by quality experts in the field and the inclusion of quality improvement methods, such as the use of statistical control process charts to elevate the status of the designation. In addition, designated hospitals are frequently provided several opportunities for wide-reaching recognition through public announcements on the CWC website, newsletters and social media, and spotlight opportunities at numerous CWC webinars and conferences. Designated hospitals join the network of ‘Choosing Wisely Canada Hospitals’ with benefits of inter-hospital collaboration and mentorship opportunities, providing dissemination of success stories and furthering the reach of the program. Other quality improvement designation programs exist, however most tend to adopt a top-down rather than bottom-up approach. These include Magnet, Best Practice Spotlight Organizations, and the European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO) Designated Centres Accreditation Program, all having been shown to benefit healthcare systems in a variety of ways.<span><sup>10, 20-23</sup></span></p><p>The Choosing Wisely Canada Hospital Designation program is a novel quality improvement model for the recognition of sustainable resource stewardship. It focuses its reward mechanisms predominately on factors of intrinsic motivation, independent of financial and regulatory bodies, in order to generate organic growth and discussion surrounding the implementation of countless evidence-based guidelines. Its grass-roots approach to sustaining improvement has garnered interest with 65 hospitals in Canada voluntarily undergoing the designation process. We believe this approach of supporting clinician-driven improvement produces results that “stick” and valuable lessons learned in quality improvement and implementation science. The next phase of Choosing Wisely focuses on engaging teams to sustain change and demonstrate ongoing improvement with data measurement. Future work will evaluate the impact of the Designation Program on clinical outcomes.</p><p>Doreen Day is an employee of Choosing Wisely Canada, and Dr. Christine Soong receives salary support from Choosing Wisely Canada, a non-profit organization. Choosing Wisely Canada did not contribute to the content or drafting of this paper. The authors do not have other relevant conflicts of interest to disclose.</p>","PeriodicalId":15883,"journal":{"name":"Journal of hospital medicine","volume":"20 8","pages":"886-889"},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/jhm.13593","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Improving healthcare value: Choosing Wisely Canada's hospital designation program\",\"authors\":\"Daksh Datta MSc,&nbsp;Doreen Day MHSc,&nbsp;Christine Soong MD, MSc\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/jhm.13593\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>Choosing Wisely is a campaign led by clinicians to reduce unnecessary resource use in healthcare. It began with a focus on raising awareness about the harms of overuse of unnecessary tests and treatments. Choosing Wisely Canada (CWC) has since been actively leading and guiding organizations in system-level implementation through education, advocacy, the creation of a community of practice, and national collaborative implementation programs. Like all quality improvement work, implementation efforts are more likely to be successful when supported by system-level enablers. Some enablers that have been studied include mandatory accreditation programs, financial incentives, and intrinsic motivators. Choosing Wisely Canada chose to incorporate key elements of intrinsic motivators in a program tailored to recognize its resource stewardship goals.</p><p>In many jurisdictions, quality improvement enablers take the form of mandatory accreditation programs such as Accreditation Canada and the Joint Commission in the United States, designed for hospitals to meet quality indicators. However, accreditation bodies tend to be designed in partnership with regulatory bodies with frameworks which are neither specific nor all relevant to Choosing Wisely recommendations.<span><sup>1</sup></span></p><p>Financial incentives for the purposes of improved sustainability and stewardship are also found in healthcare systems worldwide<span><sup>2, 3</sup></span> and have been shown to improve care in certain contexts.<span><sup>2-4</sup></span> However, there are criticisms levied towards stewardship programs structured around financial incentives and rewards,<span><sup>5</sup></span> including from physicians themselves.<span><sup>6, 7</sup></span> Many physicians may not feel that monetary incentives would motivate them to change practice patterns and feel they would increase discomfort or cause backlash from patients.<span><sup>7</sup></span> They may prefer intrinsic motivation driven by peer perception, professional pride, and reputation. Intrinsic motivation is a well-studied behavioral factor related to the core human drive to feel competent and effective in order to maintain some control on causality in their surroundings.<span><sup>8</sup></span> Whereas financial motivations and one-time payments diminish in effect over longer periods of time,<span><sup>9-11</sup></span> intrinsic motivators may sustain long-term and promote behavioral changes.<span><sup>7, 12</sup></span> Unlike financial incentives, these motivators also address the issue of dual agency: the perception that physicians place financial factors above their patients' interests. This approach builds trust by having conversations and discussions with experts rather than decreeing absolute policy changes, and produces learning networks to disseminate information, engage partners, and implement new approaches to healthcare, all of which are indicators of a reliable, competent, and sustainable program.<span><sup>6</sup></span> Further studies are necessary to properly evaluate the relationship between stewardship program efficacy and interventions developed with behavior change theory principles,<span><sup>13</sup></span> but common practices shown to be promising include peer reputation, electronic medical record support, individualized overuse data, and expert discussions and forums.<span><sup>7</sup></span></p><p>Accreditation programs designed in collaboration with the government or other regulatory bodies have also been studied extensively, with varying degrees of success in implementation and outcomes, dependent on multiple parameters of each program.<span><sup>14</sup></span> They can improve patient safety and reduce medical error rates while enhancing staff proficiency and organizational transparency.<span><sup>15-17</sup></span> However, large-scale mandatory programs have also been perceived as bureaucratic, with more paperwork and other time-consuming tasks that take away time from clinical work, negatively impacting employee performance and subsequently patient care.<span><sup>18, 19</sup></span> Thus, while accreditation programs can benefit healthcare delivery, the degree to which this is achieved is highly dependent on the approach, implementation, and goals of the governing organization.</p><p>The Choosing Wisely Canada Hospital Designation Program was created by combining strengths of established frameworks. It leverages the spirit of the Choosing Wisely Campaign, which started as a grass-roots initiative driven by professional societies to create lists relevant to their speciality to reduce low-value care. Healthcare professionals not only created lists of low-value targets but also began implementing the recommendations across hospitals. Because HDP is a voluntary program, it uses intrinsic motivators of clinicians who are committed to a bottom-up approach to high-value care. In the following section, we describe the Hospital Designation Program and early learnings which may be useful in creating similar programs in other jurisdictions.</p><p>In 2019, in recognition of outstanding commitment to high-value care, Choosing Wisely Canada created a Hospital Designation Program (HDP) that seeks to elevate the status of hospitals successfully implementing CWC recommendations with a certificate of designation and broad-reaching public acknowledgment. The appeal of the Hospital Designation Program is that it is driven by clinicians based on intrinsic motivations. The program was conceived and designed with input from stakeholders from CWC, the hospital sector, and professional societies.</p><p>In Phase 1 of the HDP, three levels of designation were offered, with Level 3 corresponding to the highest level of commitment and demonstrated improvement, including embedding a commitment to CWC into the hospital's strategic plans and mentorship of peer hospital(s) in their Choosing Wisely implementation. The HDP requirements for each level and designated hospital characteristics are described in Table 1. Level 1 designated hospitals must demonstrate successful implementation of 5 “easy wins,” system-level interventions that are simple to implement such as removing the ability to order folate testing. Level 3 designated hospitals must demonstrate successful implementation of at least 7 CWC recommendations in all or many clinical areas. The program has received national interest, with 64 hospitals designated in Phase 1, and is an effective strategy to engage clinicians in resource stewardship.</p><p>As the program matured, it was re-launched as Phase 2 in 2022 with a simplified 2-level designation process of “Quality Improvement” and “Leadership” status. Hospitals designated as Phase 1 hospitals continued to maintain their prior designation but were also eligible to transfer their designation to a Phase 2 status hospital. Hospitals seeking designation for the first time can only apply to a Phase 2 status (QI or Leadership). One reason for the new program, while still requiring the implementation of Choosing Wisely recommendations, is to focus on sustainability of results, which was not a requirement of Phase 1 hospitals. Hospitals in both the Quality Improvement and Leadership levels must demonstrate their intention to sustain Choosing Wisely efforts in the years following designation through regular submission of outcomes data. Requirements for the new program are described in Table 2. Since the re-launch in Phase 2, 25 out of the 64 hospitals designated in Phase 1 have been approved for new designations under either QI or Leadership Status and one new hospital has achieved a Phase 2 designation, bringing the total number of hospital designations achieved to 90.</p><p>Key success factors of the program demonstrating positive change include a clinician-driven, bottom-up approach, emphasis on measurable outcome data using improvement science methods, and high-profile recognition attained with designation in public and healthcare fora. Many designated hospitals describe strong clinician-led approaches to reducing unnecessary care, supported by organizational leadership. This bottom-up approach encouraged clinician engagement which aligned with hospitals' mandated goals of demonstrating system improvement. Hospitals were eager to provide quality improvement supports (e.g., data extraction and analysis, access to improvement specialists, etc.). Support offered by CWC included targeted educational webinars about the program and showcasing success stories from across the country. CWC provided opportunities to meet one-on-one with the hospital's implementation teams for any questions or issues that arose, connected hospitals with regional CWC offices to navigate local issues, and matched applicants to other similar hospitals (in size, location, population served, etc.) for informal mentorship. Through these supports, hospitals gained insight from experts on successful quality improvement implementation.</p><p>The CWC recommendations are a facilitator for hospitals looking to undertake QI projects, and we find that hospitals take pride in attaining recognition for their achievements, especially when compared to peer hospitals. Designated hospital leaders indicate that the program is a win-win for their hospitals: demonstrating improved patient care with the creditability of implementing evidence-based CWC recommendations, while receiving national recognition via the Hospital Designation Program.</p><p>The designation process requires peer-reviewed applications by quality experts in the field and the inclusion of quality improvement methods, such as the use of statistical control process charts to elevate the status of the designation. In addition, designated hospitals are frequently provided several opportunities for wide-reaching recognition through public announcements on the CWC website, newsletters and social media, and spotlight opportunities at numerous CWC webinars and conferences. Designated hospitals join the network of ‘Choosing Wisely Canada Hospitals’ with benefits of inter-hospital collaboration and mentorship opportunities, providing dissemination of success stories and furthering the reach of the program. Other quality improvement designation programs exist, however most tend to adopt a top-down rather than bottom-up approach. These include Magnet, Best Practice Spotlight Organizations, and the European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO) Designated Centres Accreditation Program, all having been shown to benefit healthcare systems in a variety of ways.<span><sup>10, 20-23</sup></span></p><p>The Choosing Wisely Canada Hospital Designation program is a novel quality improvement model for the recognition of sustainable resource stewardship. It focuses its reward mechanisms predominately on factors of intrinsic motivation, independent of financial and regulatory bodies, in order to generate organic growth and discussion surrounding the implementation of countless evidence-based guidelines. Its grass-roots approach to sustaining improvement has garnered interest with 65 hospitals in Canada voluntarily undergoing the designation process. We believe this approach of supporting clinician-driven improvement produces results that “stick” and valuable lessons learned in quality improvement and implementation science. The next phase of Choosing Wisely focuses on engaging teams to sustain change and demonstrate ongoing improvement with data measurement. Future work will evaluate the impact of the Designation Program on clinical outcomes.</p><p>Doreen Day is an employee of Choosing Wisely Canada, and Dr. Christine Soong receives salary support from Choosing Wisely Canada, a non-profit organization. Choosing Wisely Canada did not contribute to the content or drafting of this paper. The authors do not have other relevant conflicts of interest to disclose.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":15883,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of hospital medicine\",\"volume\":\"20 8\",\"pages\":\"886-889\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-01-21\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/jhm.13593\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of hospital medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://shmpublications.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/jhm.13593\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of hospital medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://shmpublications.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/jhm.13593","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

明智选择是一项由临床医生领导的运动,旨在减少医疗保健中不必要的资源使用。它开始的重点是提高人们对过度使用不必要的检测和治疗的危害的认识。“明智选择加拿大”(CWC)通过教育、宣传、创建实践社区和国家合作实施计划,积极领导和指导各组织在系统层面的实施。像所有质量改进工作一样,在系统级推动者的支持下,实现工作更有可能成功。已经研究的一些促成因素包括强制性认证计划、财政激励和内在激励。明智地选择加拿大选择将内在激励因素的关键要素纳入一个专门针对其资源管理目标的计划中。在许多司法管辖区,质量改进采取强制性认证计划的形式,如加拿大认证委员会和美国联合委员会,旨在使医院达到质量指标。然而,认证机构往往是与监管机构合作设计的,其框架既不具体,也不完全与明智选择建议相关。1为了提高可持续性和管理的目的,在世界各地的医疗保健系统中也发现了财政激励措施2,3,并已证明在某些情况下可以改善护理。2-4然而,围绕财务激励和奖励的管理项目受到了批评,包括医生自己。许多医生可能不认为金钱奖励会促使他们改变执业模式,并认为这会增加病人的不适或引起病人的强烈反对他们可能更喜欢由同伴感知、职业自豪感和声誉驱动的内在动机。内在动机是一种被充分研究的行为因素,它与人类的核心驱动力有关,即感觉自己有能力和效率,以便对周围的因果关系保持一定的控制虽然经济动机和一次性付款在较长时间内的效果会减弱,但9-11的内在动机可能会维持长期并促进行为改变。7,12与经济激励不同,这些激励也解决了双重代理的问题:即医生将经济因素置于患者利益之上的看法。这种方法通过与专家进行对话和讨论而不是颁布绝对的政策变化来建立信任,并建立学习网络来传播信息、吸引合作伙伴并实施新的医疗保健方法,所有这些都是可靠、有能力和可持续的计划的指标需要进一步的研究来正确评估管理项目的有效性和根据行为改变理论原则制定的干预措施之间的关系13,但普遍的做法被证明是有希望的,包括同伴声誉、电子病历支持、个体化过度使用数据以及专家讨论和论坛。与政府或其他监管机构合作设计的认证项目也得到了广泛的研究,在实施和结果上取得了不同程度的成功,这取决于每个项目的多个参数它们可以提高病人的安全,降低医疗错误率,同时提高工作人员的熟练程度和组织的透明度。15-17然而,大规模的强制性项目也被认为是官僚主义的,有更多的文书工作和其他耗时的任务,占用了临床工作的时间,对员工绩效和随后的患者护理产生了负面影响。18,19因此,虽然认证计划可以使医疗保健服务受益,但实现的程度高度依赖于管理组织的方法、实施和目标。明智选择加拿大医院指定方案是通过结合现有框架的优势而创建的。它利用了明智选择运动的精神,这是一项由专业协会推动的基层倡议,旨在创建与其专业相关的清单,以减少低价值护理。医疗保健专业人员不仅创建了低价值目标清单,而且开始在各医院实施这些建议。因为HDP是一个自愿的项目,它使用临床医生的内在激励,他们致力于自下而上的方法来实现高价值的护理。在下一节中,我们将介绍医院指定计划和早期经验教训,这些经验教训可能对在其他司法管辖区创建类似计划有用。 2019年,为了表彰对高价值护理的杰出承诺,明智地选择加拿大创建了医院指定计划(HDP),旨在通过指定证书和广泛的公众认可来提升成功实施《禁止化学武器公约》建议的医院的地位。医院指定程序的吸引力在于它是由临床医生基于内在动机驱动的。该方案的构思和设计得到了来自CWC、医院部门和专业协会的利益相关者的投入。在HDP的第一阶段,提供了三个级别的指定,第3级对应于最高水平的承诺和已证明的改进,包括将对禁止化学武器的承诺纳入医院的战略计划,并指导同行医院明智地选择实施。表1描述了每个级别和指定医院特征的HDP要求。一级指定医院必须证明成功实施了5项“容易获胜”的系统级干预措施,这些干预措施易于实施,例如取消订购叶酸检测的能力。三级指定医院必须证明在所有或许多临床领域成功实施了至少7项《禁止化学武器公约》建议。该项目受到了国家的关注,有64家医院进入了第一阶段,这是一项让临床医生参与资源管理的有效战略。随着项目的成熟,该项目于2022年作为第二阶段重新启动,简化了“质量改进”和“领导”两个级别的指定过程。被指定为第1阶段医院的医院继续保持其先前的名称,但也有资格将其名称改为第2阶段医院。第一次寻求指定的医院只能申请第2阶段状态(QI或领导)。新项目的一个原因是,虽然仍需要实施明智选择的建议,但重点是结果的可持续性,这不是第一阶段医院的要求。质量改进和领导级别的医院必须通过定期提交结果数据,表明他们有意在指定后的几年内继续努力。新方案的要求见表2。自第二阶段重新启动以来,在第一阶段指定的64家医院中,有25家获批新的“优质医院”或“领导医院”称号,另有1家新医院获批第二阶段的称号,使获批的医院总数达到90家。该项目显示出积极变化的关键成功因素包括临床医生驱动、自下而上的方法、使用改进的科学方法强调可测量的结果数据,以及在公共和医疗保健论坛上获得的高知名度认可。许多指定医院描述了在组织领导的支持下,由临床医生主导的减少不必要护理的强有力方法。这种自下而上的方法鼓励临床医生参与,这与医院展示系统改进的强制性目标相一致。医院迫切希望提供质量改进支持(例如,数据提取和分析、获得改进专家的帮助等)。禁止化学武器委员会提供的支持包括有针对性地举办有关该计划的教育网络研讨会,并展示来自全国各地的成功故事。禁止化学武器委员会提供了与医院执行团队一对一会面的机会,讨论出现的任何问题或问题,将医院与禁止化学武器委员会区域办事处联系起来,以解决当地问题,并将申请人与其他类似医院(在规模、位置、服务人口等方面)进行匹配,以获得非正式指导。通过这些支持,医院从专家那里获得了成功实施质量改进的见解。禁止化学武器委员会的建议有助于医院开展质量保证项目,我们发现,医院为自己的成就获得认可而感到自豪,尤其是与同行医院相比。指定医院的领导表示,该计划对他们的医院来说是一个双赢的局面:通过实施基于证据的《禁止化学武器公约》建议的可信度,展示了改善的患者护理,同时通过医院指定计划获得了全国的认可。指定过程需要由该领域的质量专家进行同行评审的申请,并包括质量改进方法,例如使用统计控制过程图表来提高指定的地位。此外,指定医院经常有机会通过《禁止化学武器公约》网站、通讯和社交媒体上的公告获得广泛认可,并在众多《禁止化学武器公约》网络研讨会和会议上获得关注。 指定医院加入“明智选择加拿大医院”网络,可获得医院间合作和指导机会,传播成功案例并进一步扩大该计划的影响范围。其他质量改进指定项目也存在,但是大多数倾向于采用自上而下而不是自下而上的方法。这些包括Magnet、最佳实践聚光灯组织和欧洲肿瘤医学学会(ESMO)指定中心认证计划,所有这些都已被证明以各种方式使医疗保健系统受益。10,20 -23明智选择加拿大医院指定项目是一种新的质量改进模式,用于表彰可持续资源管理。它的奖励机制主要侧重于内在动机因素,独立于金融和监管机构,以产生有机增长,并围绕无数循证指导方针的实施进行讨论。其持续改进的基层做法引起了加拿大65家医院自愿参加指定程序的兴趣。我们相信,这种支持临床医生驱动的改进的方法会产生“坚持”的结果,并在质量改进和实施科学方面吸取宝贵的经验教训。明智选择的下一个阶段侧重于让团队参与进来,以维持变化,并通过数据度量证明正在进行的改进。未来的工作将评估指定程序对临床结果的影响。Doreen Day是“明智选择加拿大”的员工,Christine Soong博士从一个非盈利组织“明智选择加拿大”获得工资支持。明智地选择加拿大没有对本文的内容或起草作出贡献。作者无其他相关利益冲突需要披露。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Improving healthcare value: Choosing Wisely Canada's hospital designation program

Improving healthcare value: Choosing Wisely Canada's hospital designation program

Improving healthcare value: Choosing Wisely Canada's hospital designation program

Improving healthcare value: Choosing Wisely Canada's hospital designation program

Choosing Wisely is a campaign led by clinicians to reduce unnecessary resource use in healthcare. It began with a focus on raising awareness about the harms of overuse of unnecessary tests and treatments. Choosing Wisely Canada (CWC) has since been actively leading and guiding organizations in system-level implementation through education, advocacy, the creation of a community of practice, and national collaborative implementation programs. Like all quality improvement work, implementation efforts are more likely to be successful when supported by system-level enablers. Some enablers that have been studied include mandatory accreditation programs, financial incentives, and intrinsic motivators. Choosing Wisely Canada chose to incorporate key elements of intrinsic motivators in a program tailored to recognize its resource stewardship goals.

In many jurisdictions, quality improvement enablers take the form of mandatory accreditation programs such as Accreditation Canada and the Joint Commission in the United States, designed for hospitals to meet quality indicators. However, accreditation bodies tend to be designed in partnership with regulatory bodies with frameworks which are neither specific nor all relevant to Choosing Wisely recommendations.1

Financial incentives for the purposes of improved sustainability and stewardship are also found in healthcare systems worldwide2, 3 and have been shown to improve care in certain contexts.2-4 However, there are criticisms levied towards stewardship programs structured around financial incentives and rewards,5 including from physicians themselves.6, 7 Many physicians may not feel that monetary incentives would motivate them to change practice patterns and feel they would increase discomfort or cause backlash from patients.7 They may prefer intrinsic motivation driven by peer perception, professional pride, and reputation. Intrinsic motivation is a well-studied behavioral factor related to the core human drive to feel competent and effective in order to maintain some control on causality in their surroundings.8 Whereas financial motivations and one-time payments diminish in effect over longer periods of time,9-11 intrinsic motivators may sustain long-term and promote behavioral changes.7, 12 Unlike financial incentives, these motivators also address the issue of dual agency: the perception that physicians place financial factors above their patients' interests. This approach builds trust by having conversations and discussions with experts rather than decreeing absolute policy changes, and produces learning networks to disseminate information, engage partners, and implement new approaches to healthcare, all of which are indicators of a reliable, competent, and sustainable program.6 Further studies are necessary to properly evaluate the relationship between stewardship program efficacy and interventions developed with behavior change theory principles,13 but common practices shown to be promising include peer reputation, electronic medical record support, individualized overuse data, and expert discussions and forums.7

Accreditation programs designed in collaboration with the government or other regulatory bodies have also been studied extensively, with varying degrees of success in implementation and outcomes, dependent on multiple parameters of each program.14 They can improve patient safety and reduce medical error rates while enhancing staff proficiency and organizational transparency.15-17 However, large-scale mandatory programs have also been perceived as bureaucratic, with more paperwork and other time-consuming tasks that take away time from clinical work, negatively impacting employee performance and subsequently patient care.18, 19 Thus, while accreditation programs can benefit healthcare delivery, the degree to which this is achieved is highly dependent on the approach, implementation, and goals of the governing organization.

The Choosing Wisely Canada Hospital Designation Program was created by combining strengths of established frameworks. It leverages the spirit of the Choosing Wisely Campaign, which started as a grass-roots initiative driven by professional societies to create lists relevant to their speciality to reduce low-value care. Healthcare professionals not only created lists of low-value targets but also began implementing the recommendations across hospitals. Because HDP is a voluntary program, it uses intrinsic motivators of clinicians who are committed to a bottom-up approach to high-value care. In the following section, we describe the Hospital Designation Program and early learnings which may be useful in creating similar programs in other jurisdictions.

In 2019, in recognition of outstanding commitment to high-value care, Choosing Wisely Canada created a Hospital Designation Program (HDP) that seeks to elevate the status of hospitals successfully implementing CWC recommendations with a certificate of designation and broad-reaching public acknowledgment. The appeal of the Hospital Designation Program is that it is driven by clinicians based on intrinsic motivations. The program was conceived and designed with input from stakeholders from CWC, the hospital sector, and professional societies.

In Phase 1 of the HDP, three levels of designation were offered, with Level 3 corresponding to the highest level of commitment and demonstrated improvement, including embedding a commitment to CWC into the hospital's strategic plans and mentorship of peer hospital(s) in their Choosing Wisely implementation. The HDP requirements for each level and designated hospital characteristics are described in Table 1. Level 1 designated hospitals must demonstrate successful implementation of 5 “easy wins,” system-level interventions that are simple to implement such as removing the ability to order folate testing. Level 3 designated hospitals must demonstrate successful implementation of at least 7 CWC recommendations in all or many clinical areas. The program has received national interest, with 64 hospitals designated in Phase 1, and is an effective strategy to engage clinicians in resource stewardship.

As the program matured, it was re-launched as Phase 2 in 2022 with a simplified 2-level designation process of “Quality Improvement” and “Leadership” status. Hospitals designated as Phase 1 hospitals continued to maintain their prior designation but were also eligible to transfer their designation to a Phase 2 status hospital. Hospitals seeking designation for the first time can only apply to a Phase 2 status (QI or Leadership). One reason for the new program, while still requiring the implementation of Choosing Wisely recommendations, is to focus on sustainability of results, which was not a requirement of Phase 1 hospitals. Hospitals in both the Quality Improvement and Leadership levels must demonstrate their intention to sustain Choosing Wisely efforts in the years following designation through regular submission of outcomes data. Requirements for the new program are described in Table 2. Since the re-launch in Phase 2, 25 out of the 64 hospitals designated in Phase 1 have been approved for new designations under either QI or Leadership Status and one new hospital has achieved a Phase 2 designation, bringing the total number of hospital designations achieved to 90.

Key success factors of the program demonstrating positive change include a clinician-driven, bottom-up approach, emphasis on measurable outcome data using improvement science methods, and high-profile recognition attained with designation in public and healthcare fora. Many designated hospitals describe strong clinician-led approaches to reducing unnecessary care, supported by organizational leadership. This bottom-up approach encouraged clinician engagement which aligned with hospitals' mandated goals of demonstrating system improvement. Hospitals were eager to provide quality improvement supports (e.g., data extraction and analysis, access to improvement specialists, etc.). Support offered by CWC included targeted educational webinars about the program and showcasing success stories from across the country. CWC provided opportunities to meet one-on-one with the hospital's implementation teams for any questions or issues that arose, connected hospitals with regional CWC offices to navigate local issues, and matched applicants to other similar hospitals (in size, location, population served, etc.) for informal mentorship. Through these supports, hospitals gained insight from experts on successful quality improvement implementation.

The CWC recommendations are a facilitator for hospitals looking to undertake QI projects, and we find that hospitals take pride in attaining recognition for their achievements, especially when compared to peer hospitals. Designated hospital leaders indicate that the program is a win-win for their hospitals: demonstrating improved patient care with the creditability of implementing evidence-based CWC recommendations, while receiving national recognition via the Hospital Designation Program.

The designation process requires peer-reviewed applications by quality experts in the field and the inclusion of quality improvement methods, such as the use of statistical control process charts to elevate the status of the designation. In addition, designated hospitals are frequently provided several opportunities for wide-reaching recognition through public announcements on the CWC website, newsletters and social media, and spotlight opportunities at numerous CWC webinars and conferences. Designated hospitals join the network of ‘Choosing Wisely Canada Hospitals’ with benefits of inter-hospital collaboration and mentorship opportunities, providing dissemination of success stories and furthering the reach of the program. Other quality improvement designation programs exist, however most tend to adopt a top-down rather than bottom-up approach. These include Magnet, Best Practice Spotlight Organizations, and the European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO) Designated Centres Accreditation Program, all having been shown to benefit healthcare systems in a variety of ways.10, 20-23

The Choosing Wisely Canada Hospital Designation program is a novel quality improvement model for the recognition of sustainable resource stewardship. It focuses its reward mechanisms predominately on factors of intrinsic motivation, independent of financial and regulatory bodies, in order to generate organic growth and discussion surrounding the implementation of countless evidence-based guidelines. Its grass-roots approach to sustaining improvement has garnered interest with 65 hospitals in Canada voluntarily undergoing the designation process. We believe this approach of supporting clinician-driven improvement produces results that “stick” and valuable lessons learned in quality improvement and implementation science. The next phase of Choosing Wisely focuses on engaging teams to sustain change and demonstrate ongoing improvement with data measurement. Future work will evaluate the impact of the Designation Program on clinical outcomes.

Doreen Day is an employee of Choosing Wisely Canada, and Dr. Christine Soong receives salary support from Choosing Wisely Canada, a non-profit organization. Choosing Wisely Canada did not contribute to the content or drafting of this paper. The authors do not have other relevant conflicts of interest to disclose.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of hospital medicine
Journal of hospital medicine 医学-医学:内科
CiteScore
4.40
自引率
11.50%
发文量
233
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: JHM is a peer-reviewed publication of the Society of Hospital Medicine and is published 12 times per year. JHM publishes manuscripts that address the care of hospitalized adults or children. Broad areas of interest include (1) Treatments for common inpatient conditions; (2) Approaches to improving perioperative care; (3) Improving care for hospitalized patients with geriatric or pediatric vulnerabilities (such as mobility problems, or those with complex longitudinal care); (4) Evaluation of innovative healthcare delivery or educational models; (5) Approaches to improving the quality, safety, and value of healthcare across the acute- and postacute-continuum of care; and (6) Evaluation of policy and payment changes that affect hospital and postacute care.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信