Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The STEP trials

A round-up of the STEP phase 3 clinical trials evaluating semaglutide for weight loss in people with overweight or obesity.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Implementation Science
Published in: Implementation Science 1/2008

Open Access 01-12-2008 | Study protocol

Developing the protocol for the evaluation of the health foundation's 'engaging with quality initiative' – an emergent approach

Authors: Bryony Soper, Martin Buxton, Stephen Hanney, Wija Oortwijn, Amanda Scoggins, Nick Steel, Tom Ling

Published in: Implementation Science | Issue 1/2008

Login to get access

Abstract

In 2004 a UK charity, The Health Foundation, established the 'Engaging with Quality Initiative' to explore and evaluate the benefits of engaging clinicians in quality improvement in healthcare. Eight projects run by professional bodies or specialist societies were commissioned in various areas of acute care. A developmental approach to the initiative was adopted, accompanied by a two level evaluation: eight project self-evaluations and a related external evaluation. This paper describes how the protocol for the external evaluation was developed. The challenges faced included large variation between and within the projects (in approach, scope and context, and in understanding of quality improvement), the need to support the project teams in their self-evaluations while retaining a necessary objectivity, and the difficulty of evaluating the moving target created by the developmental approach adopted in the initiative. An initial period to develop the evaluation protocol proved invaluable in helping us to explore these issues.
Literature
1.
McGlynn EA, Asch SM, Adams J, Keesey J, Hicks J, DeCristofaro A: The quality of health care delivered to adults in the United States. N Engl J Med. 2003, 348 (26): 2635-2645. 10.1056/NEJMsa022615.CrossRefPubMed
2.
Seddon ME, Marshall MN, Campbell SM, Roland MO: Systematic review of studies of quality of clinical care in general practice in the UK, Australia, and New Zealand. Quality in health care. 2001, 10: 152-8. 10.1136/qhc.0100152...CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
3.
Department of Health: Assuring the Quality of Medical Practice. Implementing Supporting doctors protecting patients. 2001, London; Department of Health
4.
Leatherman S, Sutherland K: The Quest for Quality in the NHS: A mid-term evaluation of the ten year quality agenda. 2003, The Nuffield Trust: TSO
5.
Bate SP, Robert G, McLeod H: Report on the 'Breakthrough' Collaborative approach to quality and service improvement within four regions of the NHS. Research Report No. 42. 2002, Birmingham: Health Services Management Centre, University of Birmingham
6.
Department of Health: The NHS Plan: a plan for investment, a plan for reform. 2000, Leeds: Department of Health
7.
Department of Health: The NHS Improvement Plan. 2004, London; Department of Health
8.
Department of Health: High Quality Care for All. 2008, London; Department of Health
9.
Campbell M, Fitzpatrick R, Haines A, Kinmonth AL, Sandercock P, Spiegelhalter D: Framework for design and evaluation of complex interventions to improve health. BMJ. 2000, 321: 694-6. 10.1136/bmj.321.7262.694.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
10.
Campbell N, Murray E, Darbyshire J, Emerey J, Farmer A, Griffiths F: Designing and evaluating complex interventions to improve health care. BMJ. 2007, 334: 455-459. 10.1136/bmj.39108.379965.BE.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
11.
Grimshaw J, Thomas R, MacLennan G, Fraser C, Ramsay C, Vale L: Effectiveness and efficiency of guideline dissemination and implementation strategies. Health Technology Assessment. 2004, 8 (6):
12.
Grimshaw JM, Shirran L, Thomas R, Mowatt G, Fraser C, Bero L: Changing Provider Behaviour. An overview of systematic reviews of interventions. Med Care. 2001, 39 (8 Suppl 2): II2-II45. II – 2 – 1145PubMed
13.
Pawson R, Tilley N: Realistic Evaluation. 1997, London: Sage Publications
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
Committee on Quality of Health Care in America, Institute of Medicine: Crossing the Quality Chasm: A New Health System for the 21st Century. 2001, National Academy Press Washington, D.C
19.
NICE: Principles for best practice in clinical audit. 2002, Radcliffe Medical Press, Abingdon
20.
21.
Borrill C, West M: Developing team working in health care: a guide for managers. 2001, Aston: Aston Centre for Health Service Organisation Research, Aston University
22.
Rycroft-Malone J, Harvey G, Seers K, Fitson A, McCormack B, Titchen A: An exploration of the factors that influence the implementation of evidence into practice. J Clin Nursing. 2004, 13 (8): 913-10.1111/j.1365-2702.2004.01007.x.CrossRef
23.
Dopson S, Dawson S, Millar R, Sutherland K: Getting Research into Practice: the case of Glue Ear. Quality in Healthcare. 1999, 8 (2): 108-118.CrossRef
24.
Buxton M, Hanney S, Packwood T, Roberts S, Youll P: Assessing benefits from Department of Health and NHS R&D. Public Money Manag. 2000, 20: 29-34. 10.1111/1467-9302.00233.CrossRef
25.
Byng R, Norman I, Redfern S: Using Realistic Evaluation to Evaluate a Practice-level Intervention to Improve Primary Healthcare for Patients with Long-term Mental Illness. Evaluation. 2005, 11: 69-10.1177/1356389005053198.CrossRef
26.
Shojanla K, Grimshaw J: Evidence-based Quality Improvement: The State of The Science. Health Affairs. 2005
27.
NHS Scotland: Tools to support service improvement and redesign. A Guide to Service Improvement. 2005, Scottish Executive, 45-50.
28.
Department of Health: Report of the Ad Hoc Advisory Group on the Operation of NHS Research Ethics Committees. London. 2005
29.
Baily M, Bottrell M, Lynn J, Jennings B: The Ethics of Using Methods to Improve Health Care Quality and Safety. 2006, Hastings Center Special Report
30.
31.
Committee on Quality of Health Care in America Institute of Medicine, Kohn L, Corrigan J, Donaldson M, Eds: To Err Is Human: Building a Safer Health System. 1999, National Academy Press Washington, D.C
32.
33.
34.
35.
Metadata
Title
Developing the protocol for the evaluation of the health foundation's 'engaging with quality initiative' – an emergent approach
Authors
Bryony Soper
Martin Buxton
Stephen Hanney
Wija Oortwijn
Amanda Scoggins
Nick Steel
Tom Ling
Publication date
01-12-2008
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
Implementation Science / Issue 1/2008
Electronic ISSN: 1748-5908
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/1748-5908-3-46

Other articles of this Issue 1/2008

Implementation Science 1/2008 Go to the issue

Study protocol

Incorporating clinical guidelines through clinician decision-making

Research article

Evidence-informed health policy 4 – Case descriptions of organizations that support the use of research evidence

Methodology

Overview of the VA Quality Enhancement Research Initiative (QUERI) and QUERI theme articles: QUERI Series

Research article

Acceptance and perceived barriers of implementing a guideline for managing low back in general practice

Research article

Explaining the effects of an intervention designed to promote evidence-based diabetes care: a theory-based process evaluation of a pragmatic cluster randomised controlled trial

Research article

Implementing the LifeSkills Training drug prevention program: factors related to implementation fidelity