Measuring in-hospital quality multidimensionally by integrating patients', kin's and healthcare professionals' perspectives: development and validation of the FlaQuM-Quickscan.

BACKGROUND: Measuring quality is essential to drive improvement initiatives in hospitals. An instrument that measures healthcare quality multidimensionally and integrates patients', kin's and professionals' perspectives is lacking. We aimed to develop and validate an instrument to measure healthcare quality multidimensionally from a multistakeholder perspective. METHODS: A multi-method approach started by establishing content and face validity, followed by a multi-centre study in 17 Flemish (Belgian) hospitals to assess construct validity through confirmatory factor analysis, criterion validity through determining Pearson's correlations and reliability through Cronbach's alpha measurement. The instrument FlaQuM-Quickscan measures 'Healthcare quality for patients and kin' (part 1) and 'Healthcare quality for professionals' (part 2). This bipartite instrument mirrors 15 quality items and 3 general items (the overall quality score, recommendation score and intention-to-stay score). A process evaluation was organised to identify effective strategies in instrument distribution by conducting semi-structured interviews with quality managers. RESULTS: By involving experts in the development of quality items and through pilot testing by a multi-stakeholder group, the content and face validity of instrument items was ensured. In total, 13,615 respondents (5,891 Patients/kin and 7,724 Professionals) completed the FlaQuM-Quickscan. Confirmatory factor analyses showed good to very good fit and correlations supported the associations between the quality items and general items for both instrument parts. Cronbach's alphas supported the internal consistency. The process evaluation revealed that supportive technical structures and approaching respondents individually were effective strategies to distribute the instrument. CONCLUSIONS: The FlaQuM-Quickscan is a valid instrument to measure healthcare quality experiences multidimensionally from an integrated multistakeholder perspective. This new instrument offers unique and detailed data to design sustainable quality management systems in hospitals. Based on these data, hospital management and policymakers can set quality priorities for patients', kin's and professionals' care. Future research should investigate the transferability to other healthcare systems and examine between-stakeholders and between-hospitals variation.

Sustainable quality management in hospitals: The experiences of healthcare quality managers.

BACKGROUND: Quality management systems are essential in hospitals, but evidence shows a real literature gap on the sustainable implementation of quality. PURPOSE: This study aimed to explore and identify enablers towards sustainable quality management in hospitals. Research design and Study Sample: Interviews were conducted with 23 healthcare quality managers from 20 hospitals. Data collection and/or Analysis: Data collection and analysis were conducted simultaneously by using the Qualitative Analysis Guide of Leuven and following the COREQ Guidelines. Thematic analysis from interview transcripts was performed in NVivo 12. RESULTS: The results reveal two categories: (1) quality in the organisation's DNA and (2) quality in the professional's DNA. The first category consists of: bottom-up and top-down management, the organisation-wide integration of quality and an organisational culture shift. The second one consists of: quality awareness, understanding the added value, the encouragement and engagement, the accountability and ownership for quality. Moving towards sustainable quality management systems in hospitals requires a good interaction between a bottom-up approach and leadership to ensure continuous support from healthcare stakeholders. CONCLUSIONS: This study contributes to existing conceptual and theoretical foundations with practical insights into sustainable quality management. The findings can guide quality departments and hospital management to regain professionals' commitment to quality and to establish a sustainable quality management system.

Cornerstones of a sustainable national quality policy: A qualitative study based on international expert opinions.

BACKGROUND: National initiatives launched to improve the quality of care have grown exponentially over the last decade. Public reporting, accreditation and governmental inspection form the basis for quality in Flemish (Belgian) hospitals. Due to the lack of evidence for these national initiatives and the questions concerning their sustainability, our research aims to identify cornerstones of a sustainable national quality policy for acute-care hospitals based on international expert opinion. METHODS: A qualitative study was conducted using in-depth semi-structured interviews with 12 renowned international quality and patient safety experts selected by purposive sampling. Interviews focussed on participants' perspectives and their recommendations for a future, sustainable quality policy. Inductive analysis was carried out with themes being generated from the data using the constant comparison method. RESULTS: Three major and five minor themes were identified and integrated into a framework as a basis for national quality policies. Quality culture, minimum requirements for quality education and quality control as well as continuous learning and improvement act as cornerstones of this framework. CONCLUSIONS: Complementary to the current national policy, this study demonstrated the need for profound attention to quality cultures in acute-care hospitals. Policymakers need to provide a control system and minimum requirements for quality education for all healthcare workers. A model for continuous learning and improvement with data feedback loops has to be installed in each hospital to obtain a sustainable quality system. This framework can inspire policymakers to further develop bottom-up initiatives in co-governance with all relevant stakeholders adapted to individual hospitals' context.

Patients' and kin's perspective on healthcare quality compared to Lachman's multidimensional quality model: Focus group interviews.

OBJECTIVES: To identify key attributes of healthcare quality relevant to patients and kin and to compare them to Lachman's multidimensional quality model. METHODS: Four focus groups with patients and kin were conducted using a semi-structured interview guide and a purposive sampling method. Classical content analysis and constant comparison method were used to focus data analysis on individual and group level. RESULTS: Communication with patients, kin and professionals emerged as a new dimension from interview transcripts. Other identified key attributes largely corresponded with Lachman's multidimensional quality model. They were mainly classified in dimensions: 'Partnership and Co-Production', 'Dignity and Respect' and 'Effectiveness'. Technical quality dimensions were linked to organisational aspects of care in terms of staffing levels and time. The dimension 'Eco-friendly' was not addressed by patients or kin. CONCLUSIONS: The results enhance the comprehension of healthcare quality and contribute to its academic understanding by validating Lachman's multidimensional quality model from patients' and kin's perspective. The model robustness is increased by including communication as a quality dimension surrounding technical domains and core values. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: The key attributes can serve as a holistic framework for healthcare organisations to design their quality management system. An instrument can be developed to measure key attributes.

A co-creation roadmap towards sustainable quality of care: A multi-method study.

OBJECTIVE: Hospitals demonstrated increased efforts into quality improvement over the past years. Their growing commitment to quality combined with a heterogeneity in perceptions among healthcare stakeholders cause concerns on the sustainable incorporation of quality into the daily workflow. Questions are raised on the drivers for a sustainable hospital quality policy. We aimed to identify drivers and incorporate them into a new, unique roadmap towards sustainable quality of care in hospitals. DESIGN: A multi-method design guided by an eight-phase approach to develop a conceptual framework consists of multiple, iterative phases of data collection, synthesis and validation. Starting with a narrative review followed by a qualitative in-depth analysis and including feedback of national and international healthcare stakeholders. SETTING: Hospitals. RESULTS: The narrative review included 59 relevant papers focusing on quality improvement and the sustainability of these improved quality results. By integrating, synthesising and resynthesizing concepts during thematic and content analysis, the narrative review evolved to an integrated, co-creation roadmap. The Flanders Quality Model (FlaQuM) is presented as a driver diagram that features six primary drivers for a sustainable quality policy: (1) Quality Design and Planning, (2) Quality Control, (3) Quality Improvement, (4) Quality Leadership, (5) Quality Culture and (6) Quality Context. Six primary drivers are described in 19 building blocks (secondary drivers) and 104 evidence-based action fields. CONCLUSIONS: The framework suggests that a manageable number of drivers, building blocks and action fields may support the sustainable incorporation of quality into the daily workflow. Therefore, FlaQuM can serve as a useful roadmap for future sustainable quality policies in hospitals and for future empirical and theoretical work in sustainable quality management.

[Self-help groups and patient participation: current results and projects in the Belgian region of Flanders]. / Selbsthilfe und Patientenbeteiligung: aktuelle Ergebnisse und Projekte in der belgischen Region Flandern.

In 2018, around 1500 self-help groups existed in the Belgian region of Flanders, dealing with almost 200 different diseases or problems. Most have existed for 25 to 35 years, with new initiatives added annually. The first part of this article describes the development of self-help groups and patient participation in Flanders. The second part discusses the legal framework for the participation of patient associations at the micro-, meso-, and macrolevel. The third section describes two current practical examples of patient participation in the health system: the "self-help-friendly hospital" and "the integration of experts by experience in hospitals" with initial interim results. Finally, we discuss development and growth opportunities, as well as needs of self-help groups and patient associations and their support agencies and umbrella associations. More support for self-help groups and increased recognition of their achievements can promote structural forms of cooperation with the professional health system and boost patient participation.

Patient empowerment, patient participation and patient-centeredness in hospital care: A concept analysis based on a literature review.

OBJECTIVES: The concepts of patient empowerment, patient participation and patient-centeredness have been introduced as part of the trend towards a more participatory health care and have largely been used interchangeably. Although these concepts have been discussed for a number of years, their exact meaning in hospital care remains somewhat unclear. This absence of theoretical and conceptual clarity has led to (1) poor understanding and communication among researchers, health practitioners and policy makers and (2) problems in measurement and comparison between studies across different hospitals. METHODS: This paper examines all three concepts through a concept analysis based on the method of Avant and Walker (2005) [1] and the simultaneous concept analysis of Haase et al. (1992) [2]. RESULTS: Through these methods, the antecedents, attributes, consequences and empirical referents of each concept are determined. In addition, similarities and differences between the three concepts are identified and a definition offered for each concept. Furthermore, the interrelatedness between the key concepts is mapped, and definitions are proposed. CONCLUSIONS: It can be concluded that patient empowerment is a much broader concept than just patient participation and patient-centeredness. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: The present study may provide a useful framework that researchers, policy makers and health care providers can use to facilitate patient empowerment.