ArticleJournal of infection prevention2018
Quality improvement collaborative: A novel approach to improve infection prevention and control. Perceptions of lead infection prevention nurses who participated.
Article in Journal of infection prevention, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIn response to the ongoing infection prevention (IP) challenges in England, a 90-day quality improvement (QI) collaborative programme was developed. The paper discusses the approach, benefits, challenges and evaluation of the programme.
objectiveThe objective of the collaborative was to develop new approaches to enable sustainable and effective IP. METHODOLOGY: Six trusts in the region participated in the collaborative. Each defined their bespoke IP focus. There was no expectation that statistically significant measurable improvements would be identified during the short time frame. The experiences of the participants were sought both during the programme to facilitate its constant review and at the end of the programme to evaluate its effectiveness. The feedback focused on achievements, barriers to change and benefits of participating in a QI collaborative. To measure the potential success of the projects, participants completed the Model for Understanding Success in Quality framework. (MUSIQ; Kaplan et al., 2012).
resultsSince each trusts IP focus was bespoke commonalities of success were not evaluated. Participants identified a positive outcome from their QI interventions. The MUSIQ score identified the projects had the potential for success. DISCUSSION: The feedback from the participants demonstrated that it is worthy of further development.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.