87
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Systematic review of the application of the plan–do–study–act method to improve quality in healthcare

      review-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          Plan–do–study–act (PDSA) cycles provide a structure for iterative testing of changes to improve quality of systems. The method is widely accepted in healthcare improvement; however there is little overarching evaluation of how the method is applied. This paper proposes a theoretical framework for assessing the quality of application of PDSA cycles and explores the consistency with which the method has been applied in peer-reviewed literature against this framework.

          Methods

          NHS Evidence and Cochrane databases were searched by three independent reviewers. Empirical studies were included that reported application of the PDSA method in healthcare. Application of PDSA cycles was assessed against key features of the method, including documentation characteristics, use of iterative cycles, prediction-based testing of change, initial small-scale testing and use of data over time.

          Results

          73 of 409 individual articles identified met the inclusion criteria. Of the 73 articles, 47 documented PDSA cycles in sufficient detail for full analysis against the whole framework. Many of these studies reported application of the PDSA method that failed to accord with primary features of the method. Less than 20% (14/73) fully documented the application of a sequence of iterative cycles. Furthermore, a lack of adherence to the notion of small-scale change is apparent and only 15% (7/47) reported the use of quantitative data at monthly or more frequent data intervals to inform progression of cycles.

          Discussion

          To progress the development of the science of improvement, a greater understanding of the use of improvement methods, including PDSA, is essential to draw reliable conclusions about their effectiveness. This would be supported by the development of systematic and rigorous standards for the application and reporting of PDSAs.

          Related collections

          Most cited references33

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          No magic bullets: a systematic review of 102 trials of interventions to improve professional practice.

          To determine the effectiveness of different types of interventions in improving health professional performance and health outcomes. MEDLINE, SCISEARCH, CINAHL and the Research and Development Resource Base in CME were searched for trials of educational interventions in the health care professions published between 1970 and 1993 inclusive. Studies were selected if they provided objective measurements of health professional performance or health outcomes and employed random or quasi-random allocation methods in their study designs to assign individual subjects or groups. Interventions included such activities as conferences, outreach visits, the use of local opinion leaders, audit and feedback, and reminder systems. Details extracted from the studies included the study design; the unit of allocation (e.g., patient, provider, practice, hospital); the characteristics of the targeted health care professionals, educational interventions and patients (when appropriate); and the main outcome measure. The inclusion criteria were met by 102 trials. Areas of behaviour change included general patient management, preventive services, prescribing practices, treatment of specific conditions such as hypertension or diabetes, and diagnostic service or hospital utilization. Dissemination-only strategies, such as conferences or the mailing of unsolicited materials, demonstrated little or no changes in health professional behaviour or health outcome when used alone. More complex interventions, such as the use of outreach visits or local opinion leaders, ranged from ineffective to highly effective but were most often moderately effective (resulting in reductions of 20% to 50% in the incidence of inappropriate performance). There are no "magic bullets" for improving the quality of health care, but there are a wide range of interventions available that, if used appropriately, could lead to important improvements in professional practice and patient outcomes.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            Complexity science: Complexity, leadership, and management in healthcare organisations

              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: not found
              • Article: not found

              Getting evidence into practice: the meaning of `context'

                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                BMJ Qual Saf
                BMJ Qual Saf
                qhc
                bmjqs
                BMJ Quality & Safety
                BMJ Publishing Group (BMA House, Tavistock Square, London, WC1H 9JR )
                2044-5415
                2044-5423
                April 2014
                23 August 2013
                : 23
                : 4
                : 290-298
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Department of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London , London, UK
                [2 ]National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Collaboration for Leadership in Applied Health Research and Care (CLAHRC) for North-West London , London, UK
                Author notes
                [Correspondence to ] Michael J Taylor, Academic Surgical Unit, 10th Floor, QEQM building, St Mary's Hospital, Paddington, London W2 1NY, UK; mtaylor3@ 123456imperial.ac.uk
                Article
                bmjqs-2013-001862
                10.1136/bmjqs-2013-001862
                3963536
                24025320
                dfe768a5-75e5-4ca7-a42d-3f7a6ebb08c3
                Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://group.bmj.com/group/rights-licensing/permissions

                This is an Open Access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 3.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/

                History
                : 29 January 2013
                : 25 June 2013
                : 4 July 2013
                Categories
                1506
                1507
                Systematic Review
                Custom metadata
                unlocked
                editors-choice

                Public health
                pdsa,quality improvement methodologies,implementation science,quality improvement

                Comments

                Comment on this article