Managing COVID-19 within and across health systems: why we need performance intelligence to coordinate a global response.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic is a complex global public health crisis presenting clinical, organisational and system-wide challenges. Different research perspectives on health are needed in order to manage and monitor this crisis. Performance intelligence is an approach that emphasises the need for different research perspectives in supporting health systems' decision-makers to determine policies based on well-informed choices. In this paper, we present the viewpoint of the Innovative Training Network for Healthcare Performance Intelligence Professionals (HealthPros) on how performance intelligence can be used during and after the COVID-19 pandemic. DISCUSSION: A lack of standardised information, paired with limited discussion and alignment between countries contribute to uncertainty in decision-making in all countries. Consequently, a plethora of different non-data-driven and uncoordinated approaches to address the outbreak are noted worldwide. Comparative health system research is needed to help countries shape their response models in social care, public health, primary care, hospital care and long-term care through the different phases of the pandemic. There is a need in each phase to compare context-specific bundles of measures where the impact on health outcomes can be modelled using targeted data and advanced statistical methods. Performance intelligence can be pursued to compare data, construct indicators and identify optimal strategies. Embracing a system perspective will allow countries to take coordinated strategic decisions while mitigating the risk of system collapse.A framework for the development and implementation of performance intelligence has been outlined by the HealthPros Network and is of pertinence. Health systems need better and more timely data to govern through a pandemic-induced transition period where tensions between care needs, demand and capacity are exceptionally high worldwide. Health systems are challenged to ensure essential levels of healthcare towards all patients, including those who need routine assistance. CONCLUSION: Performance intelligence plays an essential role as part of a broader public health strategy in guiding the decisions of health system actors on the implementation of contextualised measures to tackle COVID-19 or any future epidemic as well as their effect on the health system at large. This should be based on commonly agreed-upon standardised data and fit-for-purpose indicators, making optimal use of existing health information infrastructures. The HealthPros Network can make a meaningful contribution.

Comparing the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of self-management interventions in four high-priority chronic conditions in Europe (COMPAR-EU): a research protocol.

INTRODUCTION: Population ageing and increasing chronic illness burden have sparked interest in innovative care models. While self-management interventions (SMIs) are drawing increasing attention, evidence of their efficacy is mostly based on pairwise meta-analysis, generally derived from randomised controlled trials comparing interventions versus a control or no intervention. As such, relevant efficacy data for comparisons among different SMIs that can be applied to specific chronic conditions are missing. Therefore, the relevance of the available evidence for decision-making at clinical, organisational and policy levels is limited. AIM: To identify, compare and rank the most effective and cost-effective SMIs for adults with four high-priority chronic conditions: type 2 diabetes, obesity, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease,and heart failure. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: All activities will be conducted as part of the cost-effectiveness of self-management interventions in four high-priority chronic conditions in Europe(COMPAR-EU, Comparing effectiveness of self-management interventions in 4 high priority chronic diseases inEurope) Project, an European Union (EU)-funded project designed to bridge the gap between current knowledge and practice on SMIs. In the first phase of the project, we will develop and validate a taxonomy, and a Core Outcome Set for each condition. These activities will inform a series of systematic review and network meta-analysis about the effectiveness of SMIs. We will also perform a cost-effectiveness analysis of the most effective SMIs and an evaluation of contextual factors. We will finally develop tailored decision-making tools for the different relevant stakeholders. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval was obtained from the local ethics committee (University Institute for Primary Care Research - IDIAP Jordi Gol). All patients and other stakeholders will provide informed consent prior to participation. This project has been funded by the EU Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme (grant agreement no. 754936). Results will be of interest to relevant stakeholder groups (patients, professionals, managers, policymakers and industry), and will be disseminated in a tailored multi-pronged approach that will include deployment of an interactive platform.

Changes in volume, clinical practice and outcome after reorganisation of oesophago-gastric cancer care in England: A longitudinal observational study.

AIM: The centralisation of oesophago-gastric (O-G) cancer services in England was recommended in 2001, partly because of evidence for a volume-outcome effect for patients having surgery. This study investigated the changes in surgical services for O-G cancer and postoperative mortality since centralisation. METHODS: Patients with O-G cancer who had an oesophageal or gastric resection between April 2003 and March 2014 were identified in the national Hospital Episodes Statistics database. We derived information on the number of NHS trusts performing surgery, their surgical volume, and the number of consultants operating. Postoperative mortality was measured at 30 days, 90 days and 1 year. Logistic regression was used to examine how surgical outcomes were related to patient characteristics and organisational variables. RESULTS: During this period, 29 205 patients underwent an oesophagectomy or gastrectomy. The number of NHS trusts performing surgery decreased from 113 in 2003-04 to 43 in 2013-14, and the median annual surgical volume in NHS trusts rose from 21 to 55 patients. The annual 30 day, 90 day and 1 year mortality decreased from 7.4%, 11.3% and 29.7% in 2003-04 to 2.5%, 4.6% and 19.8% in 2013-14, respectively. There was no evidence that high-risk patients were not undergoing surgery. Changes in NHS trust volume explained only a small proportion of the observed fall in mortality. CONCLUSION: Centralisation of surgical services for O-G cancer in England has resulted in lower postoperative mortality. This cannot be explained by increased volume alone.

The involvement of medical doctors in hospital governance and implications for quality management: a quick scan in 19 and an in depth study in 7 OECD countries.

BACKGROUND: Hospital governance is broadening its orientation from cost and production controls towards 'improving performance on clinical outcomes'. Given this new focus one might assume that doctors are drawn into hospital management across OECD countries. Hospital performance in terms of patient health, quality of care and efficiency outcomes is supposed to benefit from their involvement. However, international comparative evidence supporting this idea is limited. Just a few studies indicate that there may be a positive relationship between medical doctors being part of hospital boards, and overall hospital performance. More importantly, the assumed relationship between these so-called doctor managers and hospital performance has remained a 'black-box' thus far. However, there is an increasing literature on the implementation of quality management systems in hospitals and their relation with improved performance. It seems therefore fair to assume that the relation between the involvement of doctors in hospital management and improved hospital performance is partly mediated via quality management systems. The threefold aim of this paper is to 1) perform a quick scan of the current situation with regard to doctor managers in hospital management in 19 OECD countries, 2) explore the phenomenon of doctor managers in depth in 7 OECD countries, and 3) investigate whether doctor involvement in hospital management is associated with more advanced implementation of quality management systems. METHODS: This study draws both on a quick scan amongst country coordinators in OECD's Health Care Quality Indicator program, and on the DUQuE project which focused on the implementation of quality management systems in European hospitals. RESULTS: This paper reports two main findings. First, medical doctors fulfil a broad scope of managerial roles at departmental and hospital level but only partly accompanied by formal decision making responsibilities. Second, doctor managers having more formal decision making responsibilities in strategic hospital management areas is positively associated with the level of implementation of quality management systems. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that doctors are increasingly involved in hospital management in OECD countries, and that this may lead to better implemented quality management systems, when doctors take up managerial roles and are involved in strategic management decision making.

Population-based cohort study of the management and survival of patients with early-stage oesophageal adenocarcinoma in England.

BACKGROUND: Until recently, oesophagectomy was the treatment of choice for early oesophageal cancer. Endoscopic treatment has been introduced relatively recently. This observational national database study aimed to describe how endoscopic therapy has been introduced in England and to examine the safety of this approach. METHODS: A population-based cohort study was undertaken of patients diagnosed with oesophageal adenocarcinoma between October 2007 and June 2009 using three linked national databases. Patients with early-stage disease (T1 tumours with no evidence of spread) were identified, along with the primary treatment modality where treatment intent was curative. Short-term outcomes after treatment and 5-year survival were evaluated. RESULTS: Of 5192 patients diagnosed with oesophageal adenocarcinoma, 306 (5·9 per cent) were considered to have early-stage disease before any treatment, of whom 239 (79·9 per cent of 299 patients with data on treatment intent) were managed with curative intent. Of 175 patients who had an oesophagectomy, 114 (65·1 (95 per cent c.i. 57·6 to 72·7) per cent) survived for 5 years. Among these, 47 (30·3 per cent of 155 patients with tissue results available) had their disease upstaged after pathological staging; this occurred more often in patients who did not have staging endoscopic ultrasonography before surgery. Of 41 patients who had an endoscopic resection, 27 (66 (95 per cent c.i. 49 to 80) per cent) survived for 5 years. Repeat endoscopic therapy was required by 23 (56 per cent) of these 41 patients. CONCLUSION: Between 2007 and 2009, oesophagectomy remained the initial treatment of choice (73·2 per cent) among patients with early-stage oesophageal cancer treated with curative intent; one in five patients were managed endoscopically, and this treatment was more common in elderly patients. Although the groups had different patient characteristics, 5-year survival rates were similar.

Risk adjustment models for short-term outcomes after surgical resection for oesophagogastric cancer.

BACKGROUND: Outcomes for oesophagogastric cancer surgery are compared with the aim of benchmarking quality of care. Adjusting for patient characteristics is crucial to avoid biased comparisons between providers. The study objective was to develop a case-mix adjustment model for comparing 30- and 90-day mortality and anastomotic leakage rates after oesophagogastric cancer resections. METHODS: The study reviewed existing models, considered expert opinion and examined audit data in order to select predictors that were consequently used to develop a case-mix adjustment model for the National Oesophago-Gastric Cancer Audit, covering England and Wales. Models were developed on patients undergoing surgical resection between April 2011 and March 2013 using logistic regression. Model calibration and discrimination was quantified using a bootstrap procedure. RESULTS: Most existing risk models for oesophagogastric resections were methodologically weak, outdated or based on detailed laboratory data that are not generally available. In 4882 patients with oesophagogastric cancer used for model development, 30- and 90-day mortality rates were 2·3 and 4·4 per cent respectively, and 6·2 per cent of patients developed an anastomotic leak. The internally validated models, based on predictors selected from the literature, showed moderate discrimination (area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve 0·646 for 30-day mortality, 0·664 for 90-day mortality and 0·587 for anastomotic leakage) and good calibration. CONCLUSION: Based on available data, three case-mix adjustment models for postoperative outcomes in patients undergoing curative surgery for oesophagogastric cancer were developed. These models should be used for risk adjustment when assessing hospital performance in the National Health Service, and tested in other large health systems.

The associations between organizational culture, organizational structure and quality management in European hospitals.

OBJECTIVE: To better understand associations between organizational culture (OC), organizational management structure (OS) and quality management in hospitals. DESIGN: A multi-method, multi-level, cross-sectional observational study. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: As part of the DUQuE project (Deepening our Understanding of Quality improvement in Europe), a random sample of 188 hospitals in 7 countries (France, Poland, Turkey, Portugal, Spain, Germany and Czech Republic) participated in a comprehensive questionnaire survey and a one-day on-site surveyor audit. Respondents for this study (n = 158) included professional quality managers and hospital trustees. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Extent of implementation of quality management systems, extent of compliance with existing management procedures and implementation of clinical quality activities. RESULTS: Among participating hospitals, 33% had a clan culture as their dominant culture type, 26% an open and developmental culture type, 16% a hierarchical culture type and 25% a rational culture type. The culture type had no statistically significant association with the outcome measures. Some structural characteristics were associated with the development of quality management systems. CONCLUSION: The type of OC was not associated with the development of quality management in hospitals. Other factors (not culture type) are associated with the development of quality management. An OS that uses fewer protocols is associated with a less developed quality management system, whereas an OS which supports innovation in care is associated with a more developed quality management system.

The use of on-site visits to assess compliance and implementation of quality management at hospital level.

OBJECTIVE: Stakeholders of hospitals often lack standardized tools to assess compliance with quality management strategies and the implementation of clinical quality activities in hospitals. Such assessment tools, if easy to use, could be helpful to hospitals, health-care purchasers and health-care inspectorates. The aim of our study was to determine the psychometric properties of two newly developed tools for measuring compliance with process-oriented quality management strategies and the extent of implementation of clinical quality strategies at the hospital level. DESIGN: We developed and tested two measurement instruments that could be used during on-site visits by trained external surveyors to calculate a Quality Management Compliance Index (QMCI) and a Clinical Quality Implementation Index (CQII). We used psychometric methods and the cross-sectional data to explore the factor structure, reliability and validity of each of these instruments. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: The sample consisted of 74 acute care hospitals selected at random from each of 7 European countries. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The psychometric properties of the two indices (QMCI and CQII). RESULTS: Overall, the indices demonstrated favourable psychometric performance based on factor analysis, item correlations, internal consistency and hypothesis testing. Cronbach's alpha was acceptable for the scales of the QMCI (α: 0.74-0.78) and the CQII (α: 0.82-0.93). Inter-scale correlations revealed that the scales were positively correlated, but distinct. All scales added sufficient new information to each main index to be retained. CONCLUSION: This study has produced two reliable instruments that can be used during on-site visits to assess compliance with quality management strategies and implementation of quality management activities by hospitals in Europe and perhaps other jurisdictions.

Development and validation of an index to assess hospital quality management systems.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to develop and validate an index to assess the implementation of quality management systems (QMSs) in European countries. DESIGN: Questionnaire development was facilitated through expert opinion, literature review and earlier empirical research. A cross-sectional online survey utilizing the questionnaire was undertaken between May 2011 and February 2012. We used psychometric methods to explore the factor structure, reliability and validity of the instrument. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: As part of the Deepening our Understanding of Quality improvement in Europe (DUQuE) project, we invited a random sample of 188 hospitals in 7 countries. The quality managers of these hospitals were the main respondents. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: The extent of implementation of QMSs. RESULTS: Factor analysis yielded nine scales, which were combined to build the Quality Management Systems Index. Cronbach's reliability coefficients were satisfactory (ranging from 0.72 to 0.82) for eight scales and low for one scale (0.48). Corrected item-total correlations provided adequate evidence of factor homogeneity. Inter-scale correlations showed that every factor was related, but also distinct, and added to the index. Construct validity testing showed that the index was related to recent measures of quality. Participating hospitals attained a mean value of 19.7 (standard deviation of 4.7) on the index that theoretically ranged from 0 to 27. CONCLUSION: Assessing QMSs across Europe has the potential to help policy-makers and other stakeholders to compare hospitals and focus on the most important areas for improvement.