Pari, V;
Sluijs, EF;
del Pilar Arias López, M;
Thomson, DA;
Tripathy, S;
Vengadasalam, S;
Vijayaraghavan, BKT;
... Yen, LM; + view all
(2022)
Development of a quality indicator set to measure and improve quality of ICU care in low- and middle-income countries.
Intensive Care Medicine
10.1007/s00134-022-06818-7.
Preview |
Text
s00134-022-06818-7.pdf - Published Version Download (959kB) | Preview |
Abstract
PURPOSE: To develop a set of actionable quality indicators for critical care suitable for use in low- or middle-income countries (LMICs). METHODS: A list of 84 candidate indicators compiled from a previous literature review and stakeholder recommendations were categorised into three domains (foundation, process, and quality impact). An expert panel (EP) representing stakeholders from critical care and allied specialties in multiple low-, middle-, and high-income countries was convened. In rounds one and two of the Delphi exercise, the EP appraised (Likert scale 1–5) each indicator for validity, feasibility; in round three sensitivity to change, and reliability were additionally appraised. Potential barriers and facilitators to implementation of the quality indicators were also reported in this round. Median score and interquartile range (IQR) were used to determine consensus; indicators with consensus disagreement (median < 4, IQR ≤ 1) were removed, and indicators with consensus agreement (median ≥ 4, IQR ≤ 1) or no consensus were retained. In round four, indicators were prioritised based on their ability to impact cost of care to the provider and recipient, staff well-being, patient safety, and patient-centred outcomes. RESULTS: Seventy-one experts from 30 countries (n = 45, 63%, representing critical care) selected 57 indicators to assess quality of care in intensive care unit (ICU) in LMICs: 16 foundation, 27 process, and 14 quality impact indicators after round three. Round 4 resulted in 14 prioritised indicators. Fifty-seven respondents reported barriers and facilitators, of which electronic registry-embedded data collection was the biggest perceived facilitator to implementation (n = 54/57, 95%) Concerns over burden of data collection (n = 53/57, 93%) and variations in definition (n = 45/57, 79%) were perceived as the greatest barrier to implementation. CONCLUSION: This consensus exercise provides a common set of indicators to support benchmarking and quality improvement programs for critical care populations in LMICs.
| Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Title: | Development of a quality indicator set to measure and improve quality of ICU care in low- and middle-income countries |
| Location: | United States |
| Open access status: | An open access version is available from UCL Discovery |
| DOI: | 10.1007/s00134-022-06818-7 |
| Publisher version: | https://doi.org/10.1007/s00134-022-06818-7 |
| Language: | English |
| Additional information: | This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License, which permits any non-commercial use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/. |
| Keywords: | Critical care, Delphi technique, LMIC, Quality indicators, Resource constrained |
| UCL classification: | UCL > Provost and Vice Provost Offices > School of Life and Medical Sciences > Faculty of Medical Sciences UCL > Provost and Vice Provost Offices > School of Life and Medical Sciences > Faculty of Medical Sciences > Div of Surgery and Interventional Sci > Department of Targeted Intervention UCL > Provost and Vice Provost Offices > School of Life and Medical Sciences UCL UCL > Provost and Vice Provost Offices > School of Life and Medical Sciences > Faculty of Medical Sciences > Div of Surgery and Interventional Sci |
| URI: | https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/eprint/10156696 |
Archive Staff Only
 |
View Item |
