ReviewOrthopedic research and reviews2016
Current concept review: quality and process improvement in orthopedics.
Review in Orthopedic research and reviews, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- A Step-by-Step Guide to Understanding and Conducting Quality Improvement Initiatives in Orthopaedic Surgery.Journal of the Pediatric Orthopaedic Society of North America · 2023Article
- Association between VTE and antibiotic prophylaxis guideline compliance and patient-reported outcomes after total hip and knee arthroplasty: an observational study.Journal of patient-reported outcomes · 2022Article
- Treatment Variability and Complications Associated With Pediatric Lateral Ankle Injuries: A POSNA Quality, Safety, and Value Initiative Survey.Orthopaedic journal of sports medicine · 2022Article
- Innovation in Orthopedics: Part 1-Design Thinking.Current reviews in musculoskeletal medicine · 2022Review
- Implementation of a Ponseti Clubfoot Program Decreases Major Surgery: A Quality Improvement Initiative.Pediatric quality & safetyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Multiple health care stakeholders are increasingly scrutinizing musculoskeletal care to optimize quality and cost efficiency. This has led to greater emphasis on quality and process improvement. There is a robust set of business strategies that are increasingly being applied to health care delivery. These quality and process improvement tools (QPITs) have specific applications to segments of, or the entire episode of, patient care. In the rapidly changing health care world, it will behoove all orthopedic surgeons to have an understanding of the manner in which care delivery processes can be evaluated and improved. Many of the commonly used QPITs, including checklist initiatives, standardized clinical care pathways, lean methodology, six sigma strategies, and total quality management, embrace basic principles of quality improvement. These principles include focusing on outcomes, optimizing communication among health care team members, increasing process standardization, and decreasing process variation. This review summarizes the common QPITs, including how and when they might be employed to improve care delivery.
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.