Harold I. Goldberg MD (Associate Professor of Medicine), William E. Neighbor MD (Associate Professor of Family Medicine), Irl B. Hirsch MD (Professor of Medicine), Allen D. Cheadle PhD (Research Professor of Health Services), Scott D. Ramsey MD, PhD (Associate Professor), Ed Gore PhD (Senior Computer Specialist)
{"title":"循证管理:利用系列公司试验提高糖尿病护理质量","authors":"Harold I. Goldberg MD (Associate Professor of Medicine), William E. Neighbor MD (Associate Professor of Family Medicine), Irl B. Hirsch MD (Professor of Medicine), Allen D. Cheadle PhD (Research Professor of Health Services), Scott D. Ramsey MD, PhD (Associate Professor), Ed Gore PhD (Senior Computer Specialist)","doi":"10.1016/S1070-3241(02)28016-5","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>The design of delivery systems that can truly conduct continuous quality improvement (CQI) as a routine part of clinical care provision remains a vexing problem. The effectiveness of the “computerized firm system” approach to chronic disease CQI was examined, with diabetes as the focus of a 5-year case study.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>A large family medical center had been divided into two parallel group practices for reasons of efficiency. These frontline structures (also known as primary care “firms”) were supported to serially adapt and evaluate selected CQI interventions by first introducing process changes on one firm but not the other and comparing the groups. Because all the required longitudinal data were contained in a computerized repository, it was possible to conduct these controlled “firm trials” in a matter of months at low cost.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>During a 3-year period, implementation of point-of-service reminders and a pharmacist outreach program increased recommended glycohemoglobin (HbA1c) testing by 50% (<em>p</em> = 0.02) and reduced the number of diabetic patients inadequately controlled by 43% (<em>p</em> < 0.01). Following this outcome improvement, patients exhibited a 16% reduction in ambulatory visit rates (<em>p</em> = 0.04). The observed outcome improvement, however, was reversed during the subsequent 2 years, when staffing austerities forced by unrelated declines in clinic revenue caused the withdrawal of trial interventions.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>The processes and outcomes of diabetes care were improved, demonstrating that CQI and controlled trials are not mutually exclusive in moving toward the practice of evidence-based management. Health care systems can, by conducting serial firm trials, become learning organizations. CQI programs of all kinds will likely never flourish, however, until quality improvement and reimbursement mechanisms have become better aligned.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":79382,"journal":{"name":"The Joint Commission journal on quality improvement","volume":"28 4","pages":"Pages 155-166"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2002-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1016/S1070-3241(02)28016-5","citationCount":"27","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Evidence-Based Management: Using Serial Firm Trials to Improve Diabetes Care Quality\",\"authors\":\"Harold I. Goldberg MD (Associate Professor of Medicine), William E. Neighbor MD (Associate Professor of Family Medicine), Irl B. Hirsch MD (Professor of Medicine), Allen D. Cheadle PhD (Research Professor of Health Services), Scott D. Ramsey MD, PhD (Associate Professor), Ed Gore PhD (Senior Computer Specialist)\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/S1070-3241(02)28016-5\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>The design of delivery systems that can truly conduct continuous quality improvement (CQI) as a routine part of clinical care provision remains a vexing problem. The effectiveness of the “computerized firm system” approach to chronic disease CQI was examined, with diabetes as the focus of a 5-year case study.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>A large family medical center had been divided into two parallel group practices for reasons of efficiency. These frontline structures (also known as primary care “firms”) were supported to serially adapt and evaluate selected CQI interventions by first introducing process changes on one firm but not the other and comparing the groups. Because all the required longitudinal data were contained in a computerized repository, it was possible to conduct these controlled “firm trials” in a matter of months at low cost.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>During a 3-year period, implementation of point-of-service reminders and a pharmacist outreach program increased recommended glycohemoglobin (HbA1c) testing by 50% (<em>p</em> = 0.02) and reduced the number of diabetic patients inadequately controlled by 43% (<em>p</em> < 0.01). Following this outcome improvement, patients exhibited a 16% reduction in ambulatory visit rates (<em>p</em> = 0.04). The observed outcome improvement, however, was reversed during the subsequent 2 years, when staffing austerities forced by unrelated declines in clinic revenue caused the withdrawal of trial interventions.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>The processes and outcomes of diabetes care were improved, demonstrating that CQI and controlled trials are not mutually exclusive in moving toward the practice of evidence-based management. Health care systems can, by conducting serial firm trials, become learning organizations. CQI programs of all kinds will likely never flourish, however, until quality improvement and reimbursement mechanisms have become better aligned.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":79382,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"The Joint Commission journal on quality improvement\",\"volume\":\"28 4\",\"pages\":\"Pages 155-166\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2002-04-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1016/S1070-3241(02)28016-5\",\"citationCount\":\"27\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"The Joint Commission journal on quality improvement\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1070324102280165\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Joint Commission journal on quality improvement","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1070324102280165","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
Evidence-Based Management: Using Serial Firm Trials to Improve Diabetes Care Quality
Background
The design of delivery systems that can truly conduct continuous quality improvement (CQI) as a routine part of clinical care provision remains a vexing problem. The effectiveness of the “computerized firm system” approach to chronic disease CQI was examined, with diabetes as the focus of a 5-year case study.
Methods
A large family medical center had been divided into two parallel group practices for reasons of efficiency. These frontline structures (also known as primary care “firms”) were supported to serially adapt and evaluate selected CQI interventions by first introducing process changes on one firm but not the other and comparing the groups. Because all the required longitudinal data were contained in a computerized repository, it was possible to conduct these controlled “firm trials” in a matter of months at low cost.
Results
During a 3-year period, implementation of point-of-service reminders and a pharmacist outreach program increased recommended glycohemoglobin (HbA1c) testing by 50% (p = 0.02) and reduced the number of diabetic patients inadequately controlled by 43% (p < 0.01). Following this outcome improvement, patients exhibited a 16% reduction in ambulatory visit rates (p = 0.04). The observed outcome improvement, however, was reversed during the subsequent 2 years, when staffing austerities forced by unrelated declines in clinic revenue caused the withdrawal of trial interventions.
Conclusions
The processes and outcomes of diabetes care were improved, demonstrating that CQI and controlled trials are not mutually exclusive in moving toward the practice of evidence-based management. Health care systems can, by conducting serial firm trials, become learning organizations. CQI programs of all kinds will likely never flourish, however, until quality improvement and reimbursement mechanisms have become better aligned.