Search

Purpose: Patient-reported outcomes and experiences (PRO) data are an integral component of health care quality measurement and PROs are now being collected by many healthcare systems. However, hospital organizational capacity-building for the collection and sharing of PROs is a complex process. We sought to identify the factors that facilitated capacity-building for PRO data collection in a nascent quality improvement learning collaborative of 16 hospitals that has the goal of improving the childbirth experience. Description: We used standard qualitative case study methodologies based on a conceptual framework that hypothesizes that adequate organizational incentives and capacities allow successful achievement of project milestones in a collaborative setting. The 4 project milestones considered in this study were: (1) Agreements; (2) System Design; (3) System Development and Operations; and (4) Implementation. To evaluate the success of reaching each milestone, critical incidents were logged and tracked to determine the capacities and incentives needed to resolve them. Assessment: The pace of the implementation of PRO data collection through the 4 milestones was uneven across hospitals and largely dependent on limited hospital capacities in the following 8 dimensions: (1) Incentives; (2) Leadership; (3) Policies; (4) Operating systems; (5) Information technology; (6) Legal aspects; (7) Cross-hospital collaboration; and (8) Patient engagement. From this case study, a trajectory for capacity-building in each dimension is discussed. Conclusion: The implementation of PRO data collection in a quality improvement learning collaborative was dependent on multiple organizational capacities for the achievement of project milestones. Significance: Patient-Reported Outcomes (PRO) are measures of a patient's health status. PROs are self-reported and do not require interpretation by the provider. PROs are being collected by many healthcare systems as a patient-centered approach to measuring and reporting healthcare quality. This case study outlines the critical issues involved in collecting PRO data and identifies the factors that facilitate capacity-building for PRO data collection. It provides an example of how the PRO data could be applied to improve patient satisfaction with the childbirth hospital experience. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives The goals of interconception care are to optimize women's health and encourage adequate spacing between pregnancies. Our study calculated trends in interpregnancy interval (IPI) patterns and measured the association of differing intervals with birth outcomes in California. Methods Women with 'non-first birth' deliveries in California hospitals from 2007 to 2009 were identified in a linked birth certificate and patient discharge dataset and divided into three IPI birth categories: <6, 6-17, and 18-50 months. Trends over the study period were tested using the Cochran-Armitage two-sided linear trend test. Chi square tests were used to test the association between IPI and patient characteristics and selected singleton adverse birth outcomes. Results Of 645,529 deliveries identified as non-first births, 5.6 % had an IPI <6 months, 33.1 % had an IPI of 6-17 months, and 61.3 % had an IPI of 18-50 months. The prevalence of IPI <6 months declined over the 3-year period (5.8 % in 2007 to 5.3 % in 2009, trend p value <0.0001).Women with an IPI <6 months had a significantly higher prevalence of early preterm birth (<34 weeks), low birthweight (<2500 g), neonatal complications, neonatal death and severe maternal complications than women with a 6-17 month or 18-50 month IPI (p < 0.005). Comparing those with a 6-17 month vs 18-50 month IPI, there were increased early preterm births and decreased maternal complications, complicated delivery, and stillbirth/intrauterine fetal deaths among those with a shorter IPI. Conclusions for Practice In California, women with an IPI <6 months were at increased risk for several birth outcomes, including composite morbidity measures. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The tracking of elective deliveries (ED) prior to 39 gestational weeks has become a mandatory requirement for all hospitals with ≥1,100 deliveries for accreditation by The Joint Commission (TJC); however, the feasibility and accuracy of monitoring efforts remain problematic for many hospitals. Here, we evaluated the feasibility of three operational approaches to tracking ED. We used mixed methods to evaluate the feasibility of 3 different approaches to tracking ED: (1) using administrative data, (2) using electronic medical record (EMR) data, and (3) using targeted data collection in a county-wide quality improvement (QI) effort. For (1), we analyzed data from the California 2009 linked birth cohort dataset, and calculated hospital rates of ED using TJC technical specifications. For (2), we performed a case study of a project that recruited hospitals to provide EMR data for the TJC measure calculation. For (3), we performed a case study of a project that recruited hospitals to prospectively track elective inductions of labor. For (1), hospital discharge data were insufficient without supplementation from the EMR or birth certificate. For (2), legal and operational issues surrounding data sharing, and non-standardized data elements prohibited hospital participation. For (3), the QI approach successfully established policies and data collection systems yet lacked infrastructure to assure sustainability at a hospital or regional level. In summary, ED tracking required the coordination and support of multiple resources to enable hospitals to satisfactorily report on this measure. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]