Development of key performance indicators to evaluate centralized intake for patients with osteoarthritis and rheumatoid arthritis.

INTRODUCTION: Centralized intake is integral to healthcare systems to support timely access to appropriate health services. The aim of this study was to develop key performance indicators (KPIs) to evaluate centralized intake systems for patients with osteoarthritis (OA) and rheumatoid arthritis (RA). METHODS: Phase 1 involved stakeholder meetings including healthcare providers, managers, researchers and patients to obtain input on candidate KPIs, aligned along six quality dimensions: appropriateness, accessibility, acceptability, efficiency, effectiveness, and safety. Phase 2 involved literature reviews to ensure KPIs were based on best practices and harmonized with existing measures. Phase 3 involved a three-round, online modified Delphi panel to finalize the KPIs. The panel consisted of two rounds of rating and a round of online and in-person discussions. KPIs rated as valid and important (≥7 on a 9-point Likert scale) were included in the final set. RESULTS: Twenty-five KPIs identified and substantiated during Phases 1 and 2 were submitted to 27 panellists including healthcare providers, managers, researchers, and patients in Phase 3. After the in-person meeting, three KPIs were removed and six were suggested. The final set includes 9 OA KPIs, 10 RA KPIs and 9 relating to centralized intake processes for both conditions. All 28 KPIs were rated as valid and important. CONCLUSIONS: Arthritis stakeholders have proposed 28 KPIs that should be used in quality improvement efforts when evaluating centralized intake for OA and RA. The KPIs measure five of the six dimensions of quality and are relevant to patients, practitioners and health systems.

Optimizing the interprofessional workforce for centralized intake of patients with osteoarthritis and rheumatoid disease: case study.

INTRODUCTION: This case study was part of a larger programme of research in Alberta that aims to develop an evidence-based model to optimize centralized intake province-wide to improve access to care. A centralized intake model places all referred patients on waiting lists based on severity and then directs them to the most appropriate provider or service. Our research focused on an in-depth assessment of two well-established models currently in place in Alberta to 1) enhance our understanding of the roles and responsibilities of staff in current intake processes, 2) identify workforce issues and opportunities within the current models, and 3) inform the potential use of alternative providers in the proposed centralized intake model. CASE DESCRIPTION: Our case study included two centralized intake models in Alberta associated with three clinics. One model involved one clinic that focuses on rheumatoid disease. The other model involved two clinics that focus on osteoarthritis. We completed a document review and interviews with managers and staff from both models. Finally, we reviewed the scope of practice regulations for a range of health-care providers to examine their suitability to contribute to the centralized intake process of osteoarthritis and rheumatoid disease. DISCUSSION AND EVALUATION: Interview findings from both models suggested a need for an electronic medical record and eReferral system to improve the efficiency of the current process and reduce staff workload. Staff interviewed also spoke of the need to have a permanent musculoskeletal screener available to streamline the intake process for osteoarthritis patients. Both models relied on registered nurses, medical office assistants, and physicians throughout their intake process. Our scope of practice review revealed that several providers have the competencies to screen, assess, and provide case management at different junctures in the centralized intake of patients with osteoarthritis and rheumatoid disease. CONCLUSIONS: Using a broader range of providers in the centralized intake of osteoarthritis and rheumatoid disease has the potential to improve access and care specifically related to the assessment and management of patients. This may enhance the patient care experience and address current access issues.

Continuous quality improvement program for hip and knee replacement.

Improving quality of care and maximizing efficiency are priorities in hip and knee replacement, where surgical demand and costs increase as the population ages. The authors describe the integrated structure and processes from the Continuous Quality Improvement (CQI) Program for Hip and Knee Replacement Surgical Care and summarize lessons learned from implementation. The Triple Aim framework and 6 dimensions of quality care are overarching constructs of the CQI program. A validated, evidence-based clinical pathway that measures quality across the continuum of care was adopted. Working collaboratively, multidisciplinary experts embedded the CQI program into everyday practices in clinics across Alberta. Currently, 83% of surgeons participate in the CQI program, representing 95% of the total volume of hip and knee surgeries. Biannual reports provide feedback to improve care processes, infrastructure planning, and patient outcomes. CQI programs evaluating health care services inform choices to optimize care and improve efficiencies through continuous knowledge translation.

Performance management tools motivate change at the frontlines.

Performance management tools commonly used in business, such as incentives and the balanced scorecard, can be effectively applied in the public healthcare sector to improve quality of care. The province of Alberta applied these tools with the Institute for Health Improvement Learning Collaborative method to accelerate adoption of a clinical care pathway for hip and knee replacements. The results showed measurable improvements in all quality dimensions, including shorter hospital stays and wait times, higher bed utilization, earlier patient ambulation, and better patient outcomes.

Voluntary versus involuntary waiting for joint replacements: new Alberta wait times rules for hip and knee arthroplasties, with provincial consensus.

Despite various health system improvements across Alberta, the wait times benchmark was not being met for all patients requiring hip or knee arthroplasty. Alberta Health Services Bone and Joint Clinical Network working groups, in collaboration with other provincial organizations, gained consensus on the development and implementation of a set of provincial Wait Times Rules. These rules standardize the definition and measurement of data elements specific to joint replacement and distinguish between voluntary (patient-related) versus involuntary (healthcare system-related) wait times. Collectively, this information will help identify trends in wait times and more accurately show where wait times can be reduced.

Perioperative peripheral parenteral nutrition for patients undergoing esophagectomy for cancer: a pilot study of safety, surgical, and nutritional outcomes.

At esophagectomy, cancer patients may be malnourished. Nutrition administered central venously is associated with complications, potentially negating nutritional benefits. We aimed to determine the safety of nutrition administered by the peripheral parenteral route (PPN) and record changes in nutritional and surgical outcome. Ivor-Lewis esophagectomy was performed by a single experienced surgeon. Consecutive patients received either 7 days of PPN perioperatively (n = 16) or oral diet reintroduction on the fourth postoperative day (n = 11). Mortality, complications, measures of body composition, protein metabolism, and biochemistry were assessed. Thirty-day mortality was 0% and 18% in the PPN and standard group, respectively. By the 90th day, mortality had increased to 36% in the standard group (P < 0.05). Perioperative PPN can be administered safely in cancer patients undergoing esophagectomy. This form of nutritional support merits further examination by larger, multicenter studies to confirm or refute the observations made in this pilot study.