Search

Aims and objectives The aim of the Paediatric International Nursing Study was to explore the utility of key performance indicators in developing person-centred practice across a range of services provided to sick children. The objective addressed in this paper was evaluating the use of these indicators to benchmark services internationally. Background This study builds on primary research, which produced indicators that were considered novel both in terms of their positive orientation and use in generating data that privileges the patient voice. This study extends this research through wider testing on an international platform within paediatrics. Design The overall methodological approach was a realistic evaluation used to evaluate the implementation of the key performance indicators, which combined an integrated development and evaluation methodology. Methods The study involved children's wards/hospitals in Australia (six sites across three states) and Europe (seven sites across four countries). Qualitative and quantitative methods were used during the implementation process, however, this paper reports the quantitative data only, which used survey, observations and documentary review. Results The findings demonstrate the quality of care being delivered to children and their families across different international sites. The benchmarking does, however, highlight some differences between paediatric and general hospitals, and between the different key performance indicators across all the sites. Conclusions The findings support the use of the key performance indicators as a novel method to benchmark services internationally. Whilst the data collected across 20 paediatric sites suggest services are more similar than different, benchmarking illuminates variations that encourage a critical dialogue about what works and why. Relevance to clinical practice The transferability of the key performance indicators and measurement framework across different settings has significant implications for practice. The findings offer an approach to benchmarking and celebrating the successes within practice, while learning from partners across the globe in further developing person-centred cultures. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To systematically review and critically appraise the economic evaluations of one to one interventions to reduce sexually transmitted infections (STIs) and teenage conceptions. Design: Systematic review. Data Sources: Search of four electronic bibliographic databases from 1990 to January 2006. Search keywords included teenage, pregnancy, adolescent, unplanned, unwanted, cost benefit, cost utility, economic evaluation, cost effectiveness and all terms for STIs, including specific diseases. Review Methods: We included studies that evaluated a broad range of one to one interventions to reduce STIs. Outcomes included major outcomes averted, life years and quality adjusted life years (QALY). All studies were assessed against quality criteria. Results: Of 3,190 identified papers, 55 were included. The majority of studies found one to one interventions to be either cost saving or cost effective, although one highlighted the need to target the population to receive post-exposure prophylaxis to reduce transmission of HIV. Most studies used a static approach that ignores the potential re-infection of treated patients. Conclusion: One to one interventions have been shown to be cost saving or cost effective but there are some limitations in applying this evidence to the UK policy context. More UK research using dynamic modelling approaches and QALYs would provide improved evidence, enabling more robust policy recommendations to be made about which one to one interventions are cost effective in reducing STIs in the UK setting. The results of this review can be used by policy makers, health economists and researchers considering further research in this area. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]