RESUMEN
In healthcare, improvement leaders have been inspired by the frameworks from industry which have been adapted into control systems and certifications to improve quality of care for people. To address the challenge to regain trust in healthcare design and delivery, we propose a conceptual framework, i.e. the "House of Trust". This House brings together the Juran Trilogy, the emerging concept of co-production in quality management and the multidimensional definition of quality, which describes core values as an integral part of the system to deliver person- and kin-centered care. In the "House of Trust" patients, their kin, healthcare providers, executives and managers feel at home, with a sense of belonging. If we want to build a care organization that inspires and radiates confidence to all stakeholders, highlighting the basic interactions between front- and back-office is required. An organization with both well-organized back- and front-offices can enable all to benefit from the trust each of them needs and deserves. A quality system does not depend on government inspection and regulations nor on external accreditation to develop itself into a House of Trust. Success will only be achieved if all involved continuously question themselves about the technical dimensions of quality and their core values during the "moment of truth".
Asunto(s)
Liderazgo , Calidad de la Atención de Salud , Confianza , Humanos , Atención a la Salud/normasRESUMEN
As part of the new Flanders Quality Model (FlaQuM) towards sustainable quality management systems, a co-creation roadmap with 6 primary drivers and 19 building blocks that guides healthcare organizations has been developed. Currently, no assessment tool is available to monitor hospitals' quality management systems implementation according to this co-creation roadmap. Therefore, we aimed to measure the maturity of the implementation of the FlaQuM co-creation roadmap in hospitals. A three-phase approach in co-design with 19 hospitals started with defining the scope, followed by establishing content validity through a literature review, involvement of content experts (n = 47), 20 focus groups with content experts (n = 79), and a Delphi round with healthcare quality managers (n = 19) to test the content validity index. Construct validity was assessed by confirmatory factor analyses and convergent validity by Spearman's ρ correlation coefficients. Based on 17 included existing maturity instruments and subcomponents of content experts, two maturity tools were developed according to the implementation of the FlaQuM co-creation roadmap: (i) a maturity matrix with 52 subcomponents and (ii) a co-creation scan with 19 statements. The overall scale-content validity index varied between 93.3% and 90.0% in terms of relevance and clarity, respectively. In a sample of 119 healthcare professionals, factor analyses revealed a six-factor structure and 16 (84.2%) of the 19 hypothesis for testing convergent validity between both maturity tools were statistically significant. Measuring the implementation of the FlaQuM co-creation roadmap and monitoring its maturity over time should be feasible by using these comprehensive maturity tools in hospitals. Results of both tools should be able to describe the current state of hospitals' implementation of the co-creation roadmap as basis for strategic improvement plans and next steps.
Asunto(s)
Técnica Delphi , Grupos Focales , Humanos , Hospitales/normas , Reproducibilidad de los Resultados , Mejoramiento de la Calidad/organización & administración , Calidad de la Atención de SaludRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Measuring quality is essential to drive improvement initiatives in hospitals. An instrument that measures healthcare quality multidimensionally and integrates patients', kin's and professionals' perspectives is lacking. We aimed to develop and validate an instrument to measure healthcare quality multidimensionally from a multistakeholder perspective. METHODS: A multi-method approach started by establishing content and face validity, followed by a multi-centre study in 17 Flemish (Belgian) hospitals to assess construct validity through confirmatory factor analysis, criterion validity through determining Pearson's correlations and reliability through Cronbach's alpha measurement. The instrument FlaQuM-Quickscan measures 'Healthcare quality for patients and kin' (part 1) and 'Healthcare quality for professionals' (part 2). This bipartite instrument mirrors 15 quality items and 3 general items (the overall quality score, recommendation score and intention-to-stay score). A process evaluation was organised to identify effective strategies in instrument distribution by conducting semi-structured interviews with quality managers. RESULTS: By involving experts in the development of quality items and through pilot testing by a multi-stakeholder group, the content and face validity of instrument items was ensured. In total, 13,615 respondents (5,891 Patients/kin and 7,724 Professionals) completed the FlaQuM-Quickscan. Confirmatory factor analyses showed good to very good fit and correlations supported the associations between the quality items and general items for both instrument parts. Cronbach's alphas supported the internal consistency. The process evaluation revealed that supportive technical structures and approaching respondents individually were effective strategies to distribute the instrument. CONCLUSIONS: The FlaQuM-Quickscan is a valid instrument to measure healthcare quality experiences multidimensionally from an integrated multistakeholder perspective. This new instrument offers unique and detailed data to design sustainable quality management systems in hospitals. Based on these data, hospital management and policymakers can set quality priorities for patients', kin's and professionals' care. Future research should investigate the transferability to other healthcare systems and examine between-stakeholders and between-hospitals variation.
Asunto(s)
Atención a la Salud , Personal de Salud , Humanos , Reproducibilidad de los Resultados , Encuestas y Cuestionarios , Hospitales , PsicometríaRESUMEN
OBJECTIVES: To identify key attributes of healthcare quality relevant to patients and kin and to compare them to Lachman's multidimensional quality model. METHODS: Four focus groups with patients and kin were conducted using a semi-structured interview guide and a purposive sampling method. Classical content analysis and constant comparison method were used to focus data analysis on individual and group level. RESULTS: Communication with patients, kin and professionals emerged as a new dimension from interview transcripts. Other identified key attributes largely corresponded with Lachman's multidimensional quality model. They were mainly classified in dimensions: 'Partnership and Co-Production', 'Dignity and Respect' and 'Effectiveness'. Technical quality dimensions were linked to organisational aspects of care in terms of staffing levels and time. The dimension 'Eco-friendly' was not addressed by patients or kin. CONCLUSIONS: The results enhance the comprehension of healthcare quality and contribute to its academic understanding by validating Lachman's multidimensional quality model from patients' and kin's perspective. The model robustness is increased by including communication as a quality dimension surrounding technical domains and core values. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: The key attributes can serve as a holistic framework for healthcare organisations to design their quality management system. An instrument can be developed to measure key attributes.
Asunto(s)
Comunicación , Calidad de la Atención de Salud , Grupos Focales , Humanos , Investigación CualitativaRESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: Understanding how small unexpected acts or gestures by healthcare professionals, known as Mangomoments, are translated into practice, what their preconditions are and what their impact is on patients and families, healthcare professionals and organisations. DESIGN: A multi-method design was used based on four phases: (1) A (media)campaign to collect Mangomoment stories (n=1045), of which 94% (n=983) were defined as Mangomoments; (2) Semi-structured interviews (n=120); (3) Focus group interviews (n=3); and (4) A consensus meeting. SETTING: Respondents from a hospital and primary care setting. PARTICIPANTS: Patients, family, healthcare professionals, managers, researchers and a policymaker participated. RESULTS: Mangomoments are mainly classified in the dimensions 'Respect for values, preferences and needs' and 'Emotional support'. Differences in importance of the dimensions were found between healthcare professionals, oncological patients and family and non-oncological patients and family. The results of the interviews, focus groups and consensus meeting were visualised by the Mangomoment model. It identifies several preconditions on the level of patients, healthcare professionals and leadership. For each of these preconditions a catalyst was identified to increase the prevalence of Mangomoments. In general, Mangomoments improved the patient and family experience and facilitated adherence to therapy and led to a positive perception on the healing process. Positive effects for professionals include personal accomplishment and anti-burnout, joy in work and a positive team atmosphere. This led to positive resonance by a relationship of trust between the patient and the healthcare professionals, feelings of tolerance during negative experiences and open communication and a safe climate. Overall, patients and healthcare workers concluded that Mangomoments led to loyalty to the healthcare organisation. CONCLUSION: Mangomoments do not only have a positive impact on patient and family but also on the healthcare professional. Leadership should shape several preconditions and catalysts which can lead to positive resonance and loyalty of patients and professionals.