Skip to main content

Table 1 Overall characteristics of the QI collaboratives structured by the 14 crosscutting QIC components (identified from Nadeem et al. by a comprehensive literature review and expert opinions [8])

From: In-depth comparison of two quality improvement collaboratives from different healthcare areas based on registry data—possible factors contributing to sustained improvement in outcomes beyond the project time

 

BOA-QIC

SwedeHF-QIC

1) Length of project

6 months

12 months

2) Convened expert panel

Breakthrough series model calls for a planning group that identifies targets for improvement change and plans the collaborative.

3 experts (including head of register)

8 experts (one project group with five persons, and one steering group with three persons including head of register)

3) Organisations required to demonstrate commitmenta

Yes

Yes

4) In-person learning sessions

2 days

8 days (4 × 2 days)

5) Plan-Do-Study-Act cycles (PDSAs)

Yes

Yes

6) Multidisciplinary QI Team

Not specified

Yes (patients were included)

7) Project responsible at unit

Yes

Yes (called coach)

8) QI team calls

Calls among QI team members or members in other participating organisations are common.

No

A mailing list with all participants was available and participants were encouraged to do so.

Yes

Coaches had the task of participating in meetings with all coaches (a phone call once a month, in total 10 times).

9) Email or web Support

Email, listservs, or others forms of web support have become a common approach for providing ongoing support.

Yes,

Done by the head of register.

Yes,

Done by the project group.

8 webinars were provided.

10) Leadership involvement/outreach

Not specified

Yes, guaranteed by the coaches

11) Sites collected reviewed data and used feedback

Yes

Yes

12) External support with data synthesis and feedback

Not specified

Yes (QI team members experienced data extraction as difficult)

13) Training for ‘non-QI Team Staff Members’ by experts

No

Yes, indirectly

(8 webinars were open to everybody)

14) Training for ‘non-QI members’ by the QI team

Yes

Partly

Additional information

 Project responsibleb

One competence centre for national quality registries (A)

Two competence centres for national quality registries (B + C)

 Information/invitation

Internal to all registering units

Open on the web

 Overall goal

A) Decrease of average age of registered persons (e.g. discovery of patients with osteoarthritis in an early stage)

B) Increased number of patients with a minimum level of physical activity after one year

A) Better quality of life for persons with heart failure

B) Decreased cases of re-admission within 30 daysc

 Costs

32 000 USD

166 000 USD

  1. aSome interested teams withdrew because of non-commitment
  2. bSix regional competence centres for the National Quality Registries have been established with the mission to promote development of new registries and to provide service to existing registries, for example for technical operations, analytical work and use of registry data supporting clinical quality improvement [14]
  3. cIdentified steps in order to reach goal: correct diagnosis, treatment recommended, structured follow-up at heart failure units, collaboration between primary care and hospital, quality evaluation by using the SwedeHF. Measurements: number of patients with control of left ventricle function is at least 90%, with RAS-blockers treatment is at least 90%, with beta-blockers treatment is at least 90%, that participated in organised physical activity is at least 90%, with structured follow-up at heart failure units is at least 90%