Dataset Information

Development of the Illinois Surgical Quality Improvement Collaborative (ISQIC): Implementing 21 Components to Catalyze Statewide Improvement in Surgical Care.

ABSTRACT:

Introduction

In 2014, 56 Illinois hospitals came together to form a unique learning collaborative, the Illinois Surgical Quality Improvement Collaborative (ISQIC). Our objectives are to provide an overview of the first three years of ISQIC focused on (1) how the collaborative was formed and funded, (2) the 21 strategies implemented to support quality improvement (QI), (3) collaborative sustainment, and (4) how the collaborative acts as a platform for innovative QI research.

Methods

ISQIC includes 21 components to facilitate QI that target the hospital, the surgical QI team, and the peri-operative microsystem. The components were developed from available evidence, a detailed needs assessment of the hospitals, reviewing experiences from prior surgical and non-surgical QI Collaboratives, and interviews with QI experts. The components comprise 5 domains: guided implementation (e.g., mentors, coaches, statewide QI projects), education (e.g., process improvement (PI) curriculum), hospital- and surgeon-level comparative performance reports (e.g., process, outcomes, costs), networking (e.g., forums to share QI experiences and best practices), and funding (e.g., for the overall program, pilot grants, and bonus payments for improvement).

Results

Through implementation of the 21 novel ISQIC components, hospitals were equipped to use their data to successfully implement QI initiatives and improve care. Formal (QI/PI) training, mentoring, and coaching were undertaken by the hospitals as they worked to implement solutions. Hospitals received funding for the program and were able to work together on statewide quality initiatives. Lessons learned at one hospital were shared with all participating hospitals through conferences, webinars, and toolkits to facilitate learning from each other with a common goal of making care better and safer for the surgical patient in Illinois. Over the first three years, surgical outcomes improved in Illinois.

Discussion

The first three years of ISQIC improved care for surgical patients across Illinois and allowed hospitals to see the value of participating in a surgical QI learning collaborative without having to make the initial financial investment themselves. Given the strong support and buy-in from the hospitals, ISQIC has continued beyond the initial three years and continues to support QI across Illinois hospitals.

SUBMITTER: Bilimoria KY

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9987591 | biostudies-literature | 2023 Mar

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Development of the Illinois Surgical Quality Improvement Collaborative (ISQIC): Implementing 21 Components to Catalyze Statewide Improvement in Surgical Care.

Bilimoria Karl Y KY McGee Michael F MF Williams Mark V MV Johnson Julie K JK Halverson Amy L AL O'Leary Kevin J KJ Farrell Paula P Thomas Juliana J Love Remi R Kreutzer Lindsey L Dahlke Allison R AR D'Orazio Brianna B Reinhart Steven S Dienes Katelyn K Schumacher Mark M Shan Ying Y Quinn Christopher C Prachand Vivek N VN Sullivan Susan S Cradock Kimberly A KA Boyd Kelsi K Hopkinson William W Fairman Colleen C Odell David D Stulberg Jonah J JJ Barnard Cindy C Holl Jane J Merkow Ryan P RP Yang Anthony D AD

Annals of surgery open : perspectives of surgical history, education, and clinical approaches 20230301 1

<h4>Introduction</h4>In 2014, 56 Illinois hospitals came together to form a unique learning collaborative, the Illinois Surgical Quality Improvement Collaborative (ISQIC). Our objectives are to provide an overview of the first three years of ISQIC focused on (1) how the collaborative was formed and funded, (2) the 21 strategies implemented to support quality improvement (QI), (3) collaborative sustainment, and (4) how the collaborative acts as a platform for innovative QI research.<h4>Methods</h ...[more]

PMID: 36891561

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectivesOur objective was to examine the implementation and associated clinical outcomes of a comprehensive surgical site infection (SSI) reduction bundle in a large statewide surgical quality improvement collaborative leveraging a multifaceted implementation strategy.Summary background dataBundled perioperative interventions reduce colorectal SSI rates when enacted at individual hospitals, but the ability to implement comprehensive SSI bundles and to examine the resultant clinical effectiveness within a larger, diverse population of hospitals is unknown.MethodsA multifaceted SSI reduction bundle was developed and implemented in a large statewide surgical quality improvement collaborative through a novel implementation program consisting of guided implementation, data feedback, mentorship, process improvement training/coaching, and targeted-implementation toolkits. Bundle adherence and ACS NSQIP outcomes were examined preimplementation versus postimplementation.ResultsAmong 32 hospitals, there was a 2.5-fold relative increase in the proportion of patients completing at least 75% of bundle elements (preimplementation = 19.5% vs. postimplementation = 49.8%, P = 0.001). Largest adherence gains were seen in wound closure re-gowning/re-gloving (24.0% vs. 62.0%, P < 0.001), use of clean closing instruments (32.1% vs. 66.2%, P = 0.003), and preoperative chlorhexidine bathing (46.1% vs. 77.6%, P < 0.001). Multivariable analyses showed a trend toward lower risk of superficial incisional SSI in the postimplementation period compared to baseline (OR 0.70, 95% CI 0.49-10.2, P = 0.06). As the adherence in the number of bundle elements increased, there was a significant decrease in superficial SSI rates (lowest adherence quintile, 4.6% vs. highest, 1.5%, P < 0.001).ConclusionsA comprehensive multifaceted SSI reduction bundle can be successfully implemented throughout a large quality improvement learning collaborative when coordinated quality improvement activities are leveraged, resulting in a 30% decline in SSI rates. Lower superficial SSI rates are associated with the number of adherent bundle elements a patient receives, rendering considerable benefits to institutions capable of implementing more components of the bundle.

Project description:BackgroundThe Anesthesiology Performance Improvement and Reporting Exchange (ASPIRE) Collaborative Quality Initiative (CQI) was launched as a partnership among hospitals to measure quality, review evidence-based practices, and improve anesthesia-related outcomes. Cost savings and improved patient outcomes have been associated with surgical CQI participation, but the impact of an anesthesia CQI on health care cost has not been thoroughly assessed. In this study, we evaluated whether participation in an anesthesia CQI led to health care savings. We hypothesized that ASPIRE participation is associated with reduced total episode payments for payers and major, high-volume procedures included in the Michigan Value Collaborative (MVC) registry.MethodsIn this retrospective observational study, we compared MVC episode payment data from Group 1 ASPIRE hospitals, the first cluster of 8 Michigan hospitals to join ASPIRE in January 2015, to non-ASPIRE matched control hospitals. MVC computes price-standardized, risk-adjusted payments for patients insured by Blue Cross Blue Shield of Michigan Preferred Provider Organization, Blue Care Network Health Maintenance Organization, and Medicare Fee-for-Service plans. Episodes from 2014 comprised the pre-ASPIRE time period, and episodes from June 2016 to July 2017 constituted the post-ASPIRE time period. We performed a difference-in-differences analysis to evaluate whether ASPIRE implementation was associated with greater reduction in total episode payments compared to the change in the control hospitals during the same time periods.ResultsWe found a statistically significant reduction in total episode (-$719; 95% CI [-$1340 to -$97]; P = .023) payments at the 8 ASPIRE hospitals (N = 17,852 cases) compared to the change observed in 8 matched non-ASPIRE hospitals (N = 12,987 cases) for major, high-volume surgeries, including colectomy, colorectal cancer resection, gastrectomy, esophagectomy, pancreatectomy, hysterectomy, joint replacement (knee and hip), and hip fracture repair. In secondary analyses, 30-day postdischarge (-$354; 95% CI [-$582 to -$126]; P = .002) payments were also significantly reduced in ASPIRE hospitals compared to non-ASPIRE controls. Subgroup analyses revealed a significant reduction in total episode payments for joint replacements (-$860; 95% CI [-$1222 to -$499]; P < .001) at ASPIRE-participating hospitals. Sensitivity analyses including patient-level covariates also showed consistent results.ConclusionsParticipation in an anesthesiology CQI, ASPIRE, is associated with lower total episode payments for selected major, high-volume procedures. This analysis supports that participation in an anesthesia CQI can lead to reduced health care payments.

Project description:Meta-analyses show collaborative care models (CCMs) with nurse care management are effective for improving primary care for depression. This study aimed to develop CCM approaches that could be sustained and spread within Veterans Affairs (VA). Evidence-based quality improvement (EBQI) uses QI approaches within a research/clinical partnership to redesign care. The study used EBQI methods for CCM redesign, tested the effectiveness of the locally adapted model as implemented, and assessed the contextual factors shaping intervention effectiveness.The study intervention is EBQI as applied to CCM implementation. The study uses a cluster randomized design as a formative evaluation tool to test and improve the effectiveness of the redesign process, with seven intervention and three non-intervention VA primary care practices in five different states. The primary study outcome is patient antidepressant use. The context evaluation is descriptive and uses subgroup analysis. The primary context evaluation measure is naturalistic primary care clinician (PCC) predilection to adopt CCM.For the randomized evaluation, trained telephone research interviewers enrolled consecutive primary care patients with major depression in the evaluation, referred enrolled patients in intervention practices to the implemented CCM, and re-surveyed at seven months.Interviewers enrolled 288 CCM site and 258 non-CCM site patients. Enrolled intervention site patients were more likely to receive appropriate antidepressant care (66% versus 43%, p = 0.01), but showed no significant difference in symptom improvement compared to usual care. In terms of context, only 40% of enrolled patients received complete care management per protocol. PCC predilection to adopt CCM had substantial effects on patient participation, with patients belonging to early adopter clinicians completing adequate care manager follow-up significantly more often than patients of clinicians with low predilection to adopt CCM (74% versus 48%%, p = 0.003).Depression CCM designed and implemented by primary care practices using EBQI improved antidepressant initiation. Combining QI methods with a randomized evaluation proved challenging, but enabled new insights into the process of translating research-based CCM into practice. Future research on the effects of PCC attitudes and skills on CCM results, as well as on enhancing the link between improved antidepressant use and symptom outcomes, is needed.ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT00105820.

Dataset Information

Development of the Illinois Surgical Quality Improvement Collaborative (ISQIC): Implementing 21 Components to Catalyze Statewide Improvement in Surgical Care.

Introduction

Methods

Results

Discussion

Publications

Development of the Illinois Surgical Quality Improvement Collaborative (ISQIC): Implementing 21 Components to Catalyze Statewide Improvement in Surgical Care.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets