A scoping review of online repositories of quality improvement projects, interventions and initiatives in healthcare

Jessica Bytautas, Galina Gheihman, Mark Dobrow

Research output: Contribution to journalReview ArticleScientificpeer-review

Abstract

BACKGROUND:
Quality improvement (QI) is becoming an important focal point for health systems. There is increasing interest among health system stakeholders to learn from and share experiences on the use of QI methods and approaches in their work. Yet there are few easily accessible, online repositories dedicated to documenting QI activity.
METHODS:
We conducted a scoping review of publicly available, web-based QI repositories to (i) identify current approaches to sharing information on QI practices; (ii) categorise these approaches based on hosting, scope and size, content acquisition and eligibility, content format and search, and evaluation and engagement characteristics; and (iii) review evaluations of the design, usefulness and impact of their online QI practice repositories. The search strategy consisted of traditional database and grey literature searches, as well as expert consultation, with the ultimate aim of identifying and describing QI repositories of practices undertaken in a healthcare context.
RESULTS:
We identified 13 QI repositories and found substantial variation across the five categories. The QI repositories used different terminology (eg, practices vs case studies) and approaches to content acquisition, and varied in terms of primary areas of focus. All provided some means for organising content according to categories or themes and most provided at least rudimentary keyword search functionality. Notably, none of the QI repositories included evaluations of their impact.
DISCUSSION:
With growing interest in sharing and spreading best practices and increasing reliance on QI as a key contributor to health system performance, the role of QI repositories is likely to expand. Designing future QI repositories based on knowledge of the range and type of features available is an important starting point for improving their usefulness and impact.
Original languageEnglish
JournalBMJ quality & safety
Volume26
Issue number4
Pages (from-to)296-303
Number of pages8
ISSN2044-5415
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2017
MoE publication typeA2 Review article in a scientific journal

Fields of Science

  • 3142 Public health care science, environmental and occupational health

Cite this

@article{b11c2396e01249159d210bf81413e11a,
title = "A scoping review of online repositories of quality improvement projects, interventions and initiatives in healthcare",
abstract = "BACKGROUND:Quality improvement (QI) is becoming an important focal point for health systems. There is increasing interest among health system stakeholders to learn from and share experiences on the use of QI methods and approaches in their work. Yet there are few easily accessible, online repositories dedicated to documenting QI activity.METHODS:We conducted a scoping review of publicly available, web-based QI repositories to (i) identify current approaches to sharing information on QI practices; (ii) categorise these approaches based on hosting, scope and size, content acquisition and eligibility, content format and search, and evaluation and engagement characteristics; and (iii) review evaluations of the design, usefulness and impact of their online QI practice repositories. The search strategy consisted of traditional database and grey literature searches, as well as expert consultation, with the ultimate aim of identifying and describing QI repositories of practices undertaken in a healthcare context.RESULTS:We identified 13 QI repositories and found substantial variation across the five categories. The QI repositories used different terminology (eg, practices vs case studies) and approaches to content acquisition, and varied in terms of primary areas of focus. All provided some means for organising content according to categories or themes and most provided at least rudimentary keyword search functionality. Notably, none of the QI repositories included evaluations of their impact.DISCUSSION:With growing interest in sharing and spreading best practices and increasing reliance on QI as a key contributor to health system performance, the role of QI repositories is likely to expand. Designing future QI repositories based on knowledge of the range and type of features available is an important starting point for improving their usefulness and impact.",
keywords = "3142 Public health care science, environmental and occupational health",
author = "Jessica Bytautas and Galina Gheihman and Mark Dobrow",
year = "2017",
doi = "10.1136/bmjqs-2015-005092",
language = "English",
volume = "26",
pages = "296--303",
journal = "BMJ quality & safety",
issn = "2044-5415",
publisher = "BMJ GROUP",
number = "4",

}

A scoping review of online repositories of quality improvement projects, interventions and initiatives in healthcare. / Bytautas, Jessica; Gheihman, Galina; Dobrow, Mark.

In: BMJ quality & safety, Vol. 26, No. 4, 2017, p. 296-303.

Research output: Contribution to journalReview ArticleScientificpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - A scoping review of online repositories of quality improvement projects, interventions and initiatives in healthcare

AU - Bytautas, Jessica

AU - Gheihman, Galina

AU - Dobrow, Mark

PY - 2017

Y1 - 2017

N2 - BACKGROUND:Quality improvement (QI) is becoming an important focal point for health systems. There is increasing interest among health system stakeholders to learn from and share experiences on the use of QI methods and approaches in their work. Yet there are few easily accessible, online repositories dedicated to documenting QI activity.METHODS:We conducted a scoping review of publicly available, web-based QI repositories to (i) identify current approaches to sharing information on QI practices; (ii) categorise these approaches based on hosting, scope and size, content acquisition and eligibility, content format and search, and evaluation and engagement characteristics; and (iii) review evaluations of the design, usefulness and impact of their online QI practice repositories. The search strategy consisted of traditional database and grey literature searches, as well as expert consultation, with the ultimate aim of identifying and describing QI repositories of practices undertaken in a healthcare context.RESULTS:We identified 13 QI repositories and found substantial variation across the five categories. The QI repositories used different terminology (eg, practices vs case studies) and approaches to content acquisition, and varied in terms of primary areas of focus. All provided some means for organising content according to categories or themes and most provided at least rudimentary keyword search functionality. Notably, none of the QI repositories included evaluations of their impact.DISCUSSION:With growing interest in sharing and spreading best practices and increasing reliance on QI as a key contributor to health system performance, the role of QI repositories is likely to expand. Designing future QI repositories based on knowledge of the range and type of features available is an important starting point for improving their usefulness and impact.

AB - BACKGROUND:Quality improvement (QI) is becoming an important focal point for health systems. There is increasing interest among health system stakeholders to learn from and share experiences on the use of QI methods and approaches in their work. Yet there are few easily accessible, online repositories dedicated to documenting QI activity.METHODS:We conducted a scoping review of publicly available, web-based QI repositories to (i) identify current approaches to sharing information on QI practices; (ii) categorise these approaches based on hosting, scope and size, content acquisition and eligibility, content format and search, and evaluation and engagement characteristics; and (iii) review evaluations of the design, usefulness and impact of their online QI practice repositories. The search strategy consisted of traditional database and grey literature searches, as well as expert consultation, with the ultimate aim of identifying and describing QI repositories of practices undertaken in a healthcare context.RESULTS:We identified 13 QI repositories and found substantial variation across the five categories. The QI repositories used different terminology (eg, practices vs case studies) and approaches to content acquisition, and varied in terms of primary areas of focus. All provided some means for organising content according to categories or themes and most provided at least rudimentary keyword search functionality. Notably, none of the QI repositories included evaluations of their impact.DISCUSSION:With growing interest in sharing and spreading best practices and increasing reliance on QI as a key contributor to health system performance, the role of QI repositories is likely to expand. Designing future QI repositories based on knowledge of the range and type of features available is an important starting point for improving their usefulness and impact.

KW - 3142 Public health care science, environmental and occupational health

U2 - 10.1136/bmjqs-2015-005092

DO - 10.1136/bmjqs-2015-005092

M3 - Review Article

VL - 26

SP - 296

EP - 303

JO - BMJ quality & safety

JF - BMJ quality & safety

SN - 2044-5415

IS - 4

ER -