Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
  1. Home
  2. Search

Refine search

Refine search

Access:
Content type:
Publication date:
Apply   From and To filters
Subject: Show more
Journals Show more
Publishers: Show more
Societies Show more
Series: Show more
Collections: Show more

Actions for selected content:

Select all | Deselect all
  • View selected items
  • Export citations
  • Download PDF (zip)
  • Save to Kindle
  • Save to Dropbox
  • Save to Google Drive

Save Search

You can save your searches here and later view and run them again in "My saved searches".

Please provide a title, maximum of 40 characters.
Cancel
×

2 results

  • A scoping review to explore the suitability of interactive voice response to conduct automated performance measurement of the patient’s experience in primary care

  • Michael Falconi, Sharon Johnston, William Hogg
  • Journal:
    Primary Health Care Research & Development / Volume 17 / Issue 3 / May 2016
    Published online by Cambridge University Press:
    05 August 2015, pp. 209-225
    • Article
      • You have access
    • PDF
    • HTML
    • Export citation
  • Introduction

    Practice-based performance measurement is fundamental for improvement and accountability in primary care. Traditional performance measurement of the patient’s experience is often too costly and cumbersome for most practices.

    Objective/Methods

    This scoping review explores the literature on the use of interactive voice response (IVR) telephone surveys to identify lessons for its use for collecting data on patient-reported outcome measures at the primary care practice level.

    Results

    The literature suggests IVR could potentially increase the capacity to reach more representative patient samples and those traditionally most difficult to engage. There is potential for long-term cost effectiveness and significant decrease of the burden on practices involved in collecting patient survey data. Challenges such as low response rates, mode effects, high initial set-up costs and maintenance fees, are also reported and require careful attention.

    Conclusion

    This review suggests IVR may be a feasible alternative to traditional patient data collection methods, which should be further explored.

  • Benchmarking as a tool of continuous quality improvement in postoperative pain management

  • W. Meissner, K. Ullrich, S. Zwacka
  • Journal:
    European Journal of Anaesthesiology / Volume 23 / Issue 2 / February 2006
    Published online by Cambridge University Press:
    20 January 2006, pp. 142-148
    Print publication:
    February 2006

  • Summary

    Background and objective: Quality of acute pain management is far from being satisfactory. These deficits are not caused by the complexity of the medical problem but by difficulties in organization and hospital structures, sand procedures. Continuous quality improvement is a recommended tool to overcome such difficulties and to increase quality in the long run. This study reports the implementation of benchmarking-based continuous quality improvement to improve postoperative pain management at a university hospital. Methods: A specialised pain nurse interviewed patients of three surgical departments on the first day after surgery, and continuously assessed process and outcome quality parameters. A multidisciplinary team of anaesthetists, surgeons, nurses and pharmacists implemented a regular procedure of data analysing and internal benchmarking. Results and suggested improvements were fed back to the healthcare teams. Results: From 1998 to 2002, 6756 patients were assessed. Average pain on ambulation and maximal pain were 3.7 ± 2.4 and 5.0 ± 2.5 (mean ± SD) on a 11-point numeric rating scale. Pain intensity at rest was 1.9 ± 1.8. Over time, pain intensity on ambulation decreased (P = 0.022) whereas maximal pain and pain at rest remained unchanged. There was an increase in the number of patients who received non-opioid analgesia (P < 0.001). Conclusions: A continuous quality improvement process could be established and is now successfully used in clinical routine. Cornerstones of this project were frequent assessments of process and outcome parameters, regular benchmarking and implementation of feedback mechanisms. Changes in organization of medical management and multidisciplinary teamwork seem to be more important than medical or technical aspects.