PowerPoint Presentation

Document Sample
PowerPoint Presentation Powered By Docstoc
					Where in the world is
improvement science?
5th October 2012

G. Ross Baker, University of Toronto
Naomi Fulop, University College London
Improvement Science – what is it?
• Improvement science is an umbrella term that
  encompasses quality improvement, patient safety and
  related approaches
• Studies improvement and supporting efforts to improve
  care, translating evidence of effective practice into daily
  work
• Roots in methods developed in industry, as well as new
  approaches to the assessment and application of
  evidence



                                                                2
Map of IS Centres – full view
http://tinyurl.com/ISCworld
Map of IS Centres – zoom on London
Map of IS Centres – obtaining details
Improvement Science Environmental Scan
• Commissioned by the Health Foundation to inform
   – their support of improvement science programmes
   – the work of the Improvement Science Development Group
• Carried out by:



   G. Ross Baker           Naomi Fulop
   Kaveh Shojania          Angus Ramsay
   Lisha Lo


                                                             6
Rationale and goal
• Aims
  – identify centres of excellence in healthcare improvement
    science in academia/elsewhere
  – Identify programmes of research, graduate and post graduate
    study, and development and service demonstration projects
  – inform HF’s support of improvement science and serve as a
    resource to others




                                                                  7
Methods - database development
• Development of a database of Improvement Science
  Centres
   – Online search using terms including “healthcare quality”,
     “patient safety” and related concepts
   – Inquiries also made with contacts in universities and healthcare
     organizations in England, Europe, and North America


• Additional information gathered from journals and other
  publicly available sources



                                                                    8
Methods - interviews
• Interviews with representatives of ISCs where
   – Improvement science was a central focus
   – At least three externally supported grants or a defined program of
     teaching
   – Moderate to high level of engagement with local health providers
   – At least two identified faculty
• Interview topics
   – Defining ‘improvement science’
   – ISC activity: aims, research, education, collaboration
   – Achievements and obstacles

   Ethics approval obtained at King’s College London and the University of
   Toronto                                                          9
Methods - analysis

• Data analysed to
   – produce descriptive profiles of ISCs
   – establish research and educational trends
   – identify the current state of improvement science centres in
     England, North American and Europe and opportunities for
     future development




                                                                    10
Results

• 100 Centres identified through initial on line search
• 82 met inclusion criteria and contacted for interviews
• 43 interviews carried out (18 UK, 18 North America, 5
  Mainland Europe and 2 Australia)




                                                           11
Core findings
• Centres quite heterogeneous in focus & activities
• Foci often linked to
   – interests of lead faculty
   – patterns of funding from research councils and similar bodies
• Current funding sources are not secure for many centres,
  although some centres have prospered on large
  endowments




                                                                     12
Centres are quite heterogeneous
• Centres have a wide range of foci
   – “patient safety”, “quality improvement”, “comparative
     effectiveness” and other interests
• Most centres combine research and educational
  activities, but a broad continuum in their involvement in
  both
• Little consistency in terms used for “improvement
  science” and related disciplines & methods




                                                             13
UK centres - context
• Prioritisation of “translational research” has spurred
  investment in improvement science to address the gap
  between evidence and healthcare delivery
• Several initiatives have contributed to ISC development –
  e.g. through NIHR
   – Collaborations in Leadership in Applied Health Research Centres
   – Patient Safety and Service Quality Research Centres
   – Programme Grants for Applied Research




                                                                 14
UK centres - summary

• Almost all UK centres located in university settings

• 1/3 represent formal partnership between academic and
  healthcare organisations




                                                         15
UK centres - research
• Key research themes include:
   –   Evaluation
   –   Innovation
   –   Patient Safety
   –   Measurement
   –   Organization and delivery of care
   –   Public health
   –   Implementation
   –   Knowledge translation




                                           16
UK centres - education
• Strong focus at master’s, doctoral, and post-doctoral
  levels
• Many centres support large numbers of Ph.D. students
• Many willing to support further doctoral level education
  contingent on funding
• Mechanisms developed to build IS knowledge between
  university and healthcare environments:
   – NIHR CLAHRC diffusion fellows
   – NIHR King’s PSSQ Secondee Programme
   – Education programmes, e.g. short courses, professional
     doctorates

                                                              17
UK example 1
Institute of Health & Society, Newcastle University
– Research on patient safety, health economics, behaviour change
– Various contexts, e.g. public health, applied health interventions,
  decision making & organisation of care
– Education: many PhDs and Post-doc fellowships (ESRC, MRC, NIHR)
– Also, Health Foundation internships to support promising
  undergraduates in continuing education
– Collaboration: partners with local NHS organisations & shares a
  joint research with local NHS trust
– FUSE – Centre for Translational research in public health – with 5
  universities in North East England
– Has supported a new campus of Newcastle University in Malaysia

                                                                  18
UK example 2
NIHR CLAHRC for the South West Peninsula
– Research: primary research on clinical uncertainties and how to most
  effectively improve services.
– Topics include health conditions (e.g. stroke & hypertension) and
  technology (online networks and SMS support groups for teenagers).
– Education: c15 PhD students; 30 staff who can support PhDs.
– short tailored training programmes, e.g. on evidence based practice
– International course on designing and evaluating complex
  interventions.
– Collaboration: formal partnership of local NHS organisations and
  universities in Devon and Cornwall.
– Involvement of end users and service users prioritised, e.g. groups
  covering local approach to drugs and health tech, and public involvement
                                                                      19
UK example 3
Social Dimensions of Healthcare Institute
– Demonstrates how two organisations can collaborate to build on
  each others’ strengths
– Research focuses on patient safety and quality improvement
 • social science disciplines in St Andrews (e.g. sociology & anthropology)
 • strong clinical focus in Dundee
– Post-graduate education covers students from clinical and non-
  clinical backgrounds; shared clinical & academic supervisors
– Collaboration: institute is founded on collaboration between two
  universities. Further academic collaboration occurs in the UK and
  internationally (e.g. UK and US); and there is strong local
  collaboration with NHS partners in Tayside and Fife


                                                                          20
UK example 4
IMPLEMENT@BU, University of Bangor
– Research themes: collaboration, evaluation, service improvement and
  methodological innovation, carried out in acute care and care homes
– Considers changes at process and organisational levels.
– Theory development around PARIHS framework.
– Education: professional doctorate for senior health service managers
– Master’s level training on research methods, implementation science
  and evidence synthesis. Co-led by the local health board.
– Collaboration: international academic partners, NHS organisations
  focusing on acute and long term healthcare.
– Also recently worked with the local police force to translate learning
  from healthcare to their setting.
                                                                   21
North American centres
• Improvement science centres in the US and Canada also
  vary in scope & activities
• Period of origin important in foci
   – Early centres (1980s, early 1990s) were developed by pioneers
     with specific interests in improvement (e.g., University of
     Wisconsin and Dartmouth Medical School)
   – Much work in this era centered in large healthcare systems and
     work by IHI
   – Driven largely by immediate practical issues and thus very
     applied in focus



                                                                 22
North American centres, continued
• Following pivotal IOM reports (1999 and 2001), AHRQ
  funded centres focused on patient safety
   – often collaborations between medical and other professional
     schools and academic medical centres (e.g., The Brigham
     Center)
• More recent ISCs driven by interest and funding in clinical
  effectiveness and translational research




                                                                   23
North American centres: research
• Key research themes include:
   –   Informatics
   –   Patient safety (broadly)
   –   Medication safety
   –   Safety in specific settings (e.g., primary care)
   –   Policy
   –   Hospital-acquired infection prevention
   –   Design
   –   Measurement of outcomes, performance, quality and safety
   –   Team work and communications


                                                                  24
North American centres – education (1)
• Between 1990 and 2000 many US centres developed
  educational programmes concurrent with their research
  programmes
   – Short programs on QI/patient safety knowledge and skills relevant
     to clinical practice
• Very few dedicated Master’s programs developed in early
  2000s
   – Graduate studies in patient safety and QI were part of broader HSR
     programs, often strongly influenced by interests of key personnel




                                                                 25
North American centres – education (2)
• However, new Master’s programs have been launched in
  recent years in the US and Canada, with more in
  development
   – Increasing capacity for graduate education, and provide
     opportunities to review such curricula
• Other innovative programs, e.g. VA Quality Scholars and the
  Harvard Fellowship in Patient Safety and Quality, have
  created new educational opportunities




                                                               26
Improvement Science in Mainland Europe
• Interviews carried out with 5 ISCs in Europe
• Centres developed in response to local interests and
  emerging opportunities
 – Chalmers University in Gothenburg developed a Centre for
   Healthcare Improvement to support local organisations’ interest in a
   more scientific approach to QI
 – UMC Utrecht Patient Safety Centre developed due to CEO’s
   prioritisation of safety research
 – Institute of Health Policy and Management (Erasmus) & IQ Scientific
   Institute (Radboud) prioritise new challenges, e.g. global health,
   consultancy work and e-communications


                                                                  27
Summary of Findings
• ISCs increasing in number in UK, Europe and North
  America
• ISCs are heterogeneous in scope, activities and size
   – Some are “nested” within larger units, with improvement
     science only a limited part of the agenda
   – BUT such centres have scale to support expanded teaching and
     research programs




                                                               28
Summary of Findings
• ISCs increasingly focus on specific foci, e.g. patient safety;
  thus vulnerable to shifts in funding and research interests
  of key faculty
   – Support for patient safety research in the US has ebbed, leading
     to retrenchment or refocus on supporting health system
     education and practice development
   – New funding for comparative effectiveness research in the US
     will stimulate a focus on outcomes research
   – This may result in strong shifts in focus by many centres.




                                                                  29
Continuing challenges

• Can ISCs develop sustainable revenues to support
  research and education?

• Can a graduate curriculum linking improvement science
  to underlying disciplinary knowledge (e.g. health
  sciences, social sciences, engineering) be developed?




                                                      30
           Continuing challenges

• Are long-term partnerships
  between academic and
  delivery organizations
  sustainable?

• What are the effective
  models for such units?




                                   31
             Continuing challenges
• How can ISCs balance
  institutional imperatives of
  academic and practice based
  units?

• How can capacity of IS
  researchers be increased, with
  capabilities required to work
  across disciplinary &
  organisational boundaries?



                                     32
Continuing challenges

• How can fruitful epistemological debate be encouraged
  that helps identify useful methods and theories to
  advance the debate?



• What could be the role of the ISDG in addressing some of
  these challenges?



                                                          33
Questions? Comments?




                       34

				
DOCUMENT INFO
Shared By:
Categories:
Tags:
Stats:
views:2
posted:11/4/2012
language:English
pages:34