Qualitative process evaluation of the Perioperative Quality Improvement Programme (PQIP): study protocol

被引:9
|
作者
Wagstaff, Duncan [1 ,2 ]
Moonesinghe, S. Ramani [1 ,2 ]
Fulop, Naomi J. [3 ]
Vindrola-Padros, Cecilia [3 ]
机构
[1] Royal Coll Anaesthetists, Hlth Serv Res Ctr, London, England
[2] UCL, Res Dept Targeted Intervent, Ctr Perioperat Med, London, England
[3] UCL, Dept Appl Hlth Res, London, England
来源
BMJ OPEN | 2019年 / 9卷 / 07期
关键词
SURGICAL OUTCOMES; FEEDBACK; AUDIT; CARE; INTERVENTIONS; POLICY;
D O I
10.1136/bmjopen-2019-030214
中图分类号
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
Introduction The Perioperative Quality Improvement Programme (PQIP) is designed to measure complications after major elective surgery and improve these through feedback of data to clinicians. Previous research suggests that despite the significant resources which go into collecting data for national clinical audits, the information they contain is not always used effectively to improve local services. Methods and analysis We will conduct a formative process evaluation of PQIP comprising a multisited qualitative study to analyse PQIPs programme theory, barriers, facilitators and wider contextual factors that influence implementation. The research will be carried out with the PQIP project team and six National Health Service (NHS) Trusts in England, selected according to geographical location, type of hospital, size and level of engagement with PQIP. We will include one Trust which has not expressed interest in the PQIP for comparison and to explore the role of secular trend in any changes in practice. We will use semi-structured interviews (up to 144 in Trusts and 12 with the project team), non-participant observations (up to 150 hours) and documentary analysis. We will track the lifecycle of perioperative data, exploring the transformations it undergoes from creation to use. We will use framework analysis with categories both from our research questions and from themes emerging from the data. Ethics and dissemination Ethical approval has been granted from the University College London Research Ethics Committee (ref 10375/001). Permissions to conduct research at NHS Trusts have been granted by local Research and Development offices in coordination with the Health Research Authority. We will follow guidelines for data security, confidentiality and information governance. Findings will be shared at regular time points with the PQIP project team to inform the implementation of the programme, and with participating NHS Trusts to help them reflect on how they currently use data for improvement of perioperative services.
引用
收藏
页数:8
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [41] Ethnographic process evaluation of a quality improvement project to improve transitions of care for older people
    Sutton, Elizabeth
    Dixon-Woods, Mary
    Tarrant, Carolyn
    BMJ OPEN, 2016, 6 (08):
  • [42] Adults living with type 2 diabetes experiences of a randomised adapted diabetes nutrition education programme: a qualitative process evaluation
    Muchiri, Jane W.
    Gericke, Gerda J.
    Rheeder, Paul
    SOUTH AFRICAN JOURNAL OF CLINICAL NUTRITION, 2024, 37 (02) : 77 - 83
  • [43] Measuring the effects of guided clinical reasoning on the Advanced Nursing Process quality, on nurses' knowledge and attitude: Study protocol
    Leoni-Scheiber, Claudia
    Mayer, Hanna
    Muller-Staub, Maria
    NURSING OPEN, 2019, 6 (03): : 1269 - 1280
  • [44] Walking the line between assessment, improvement and learning: a qualitative study on opportunities and risks of incorporating peer discussion of audit and feedback within quality improvement in general practice
    van der Winden, Dorien
    van Dijk, Nynke
    Visser, Mechteld R. M.
    Bont, Jettie
    BMJ OPEN, 2023, 13 (01):
  • [45] A realist evaluation of the implementation of a large-scale school eye health programme in India: a qualitative study
    Seelam, Bharani
    Liu, Hueiming
    Borah, Rishi Raj
    Sheeladevi, Sethu
    Keay, Lisa
    Mohan, Amit
    Narayanan, Anuradha
    Sil, Asim
    Joseph, Elizabeth
    Hussaindeen, Jameel Riz-Wana
    Dole, Kuldeep
    Parappuram, Mary Sebastian
    Narwadkar, Pravin
    Ali, Rahul
    Bhaskaran, Sahithya
    Sil, Subhra
    Kuyyadiyil, Subeesh
    Vijayalakshmi, Perumalsamy
    OPHTHALMIC AND PHYSIOLOGICAL OPTICS, 2021, 41 (03) : 565 - 581
  • [46] Evaluating the PRASE patient safety intervention - a multi-centre, cluster trial with a qualitative process evaluation: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial
    Sheard, Laura
    O'Hara, Jane
    Armitage, Gerry
    Wright, John
    Cocks, Kim
    McEachan, Rosemary
    Watt, Ian
    Lawton, Rebecca
    TRIALS, 2014, 15
  • [47] Process evaluation of comprehensive sexuality education programme in Zambia: a focus on contextual factors, mechanisms of impact, quality of development and implementation process
    Mukanga, Bright
    Dlamini, Siyabonga Blessing
    Taylor, Myra
    BMC HEALTH SERVICES RESEARCH, 2024, 24 (01)
  • [48] Applying the quality improvement collaborative method to process redesign: a multiple case study
    Vos, Leti
    Duckers, Michel L. A.
    Wagner, Cordula
    van Merode, Godefridus G.
    IMPLEMENTATION SCIENCE, 2010, 5
  • [49] A qualitative study of the barriers and facilitators impacting the implementation of a quality improvement program for emergency departments: SurgeCon
    Anaraki, Nahid Rahimipour
    Mukhopadhyay, Meghraj
    Jewer, Jennifer
    Patey, Christopher
    Norman, Paul
    Hurley, Oliver
    Etchegary, Holly
    Asghari, Shabnam
    BMC HEALTH SERVICES RESEARCH, 2024, 24 (01)
  • [50] Factors influencing family physician engagement in practice-based quality improvement Qualitative study
    Kiran, Tara
    Rozmovits, Linda
    O'Brien, Patricia
    CANADIAN FAMILY PHYSICIAN, 2023, 69 (05) : E113 - E119