Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35039304›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2022

Quality improvement in a crisis: a qualitative study of experiences and lessons learned from the Irish National Ambulance Service response to the COVID-19 pandemic.

Eithne Heffernan, Dylan Keegan, Bridget Clarke, Conor Deasy, Cathal O'Donnell, Philip Crowley, Angela Hughes, Andrew W Murphy, Siobhán Masterson

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Eithne HeffernanDiscipline of General Practice, Clinical Science Institute, School of Medicine, National University of Ireland Galway, Galway, Ireland eithne.heffernan@nuigalway.ie.ORCID 0000-0003-4485-7658
Dylan KeeganDiscipline of General Practice, Clinical Science Institute, School of Medicine, National University of Ireland Galway, Galway, Ireland.
Bridget ClarkeNational Ambulance Service, Health Service Executive, Dublin, Ireland.
Conor DeasyNational Ambulance Service, Health Service Executive, Dublin, Ireland.
Cathal O'DonnellClinical Directorate, National Ambulance Service, Health Service Executive, Limerick, Ireland.
Philip CrowleyHealth Service Executive, Dublin, Ireland.
Angela HughesQuality Improvement Division, Health Service Executive, Dublin, Ireland.
Andrew W MurphyDiscipline of General Practice, Clinical Science Institute, School of Medicine, National University of Ireland Galway, Galway, Ireland.
Siobhán MastersonDiscipline of General Practice, Clinical Science Institute, School of Medicine, National University of Ireland Galway, Galway, Ireland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesThe COVID-19 pandemic has produced radical changes in international health services. In Ireland, the National Ambulance Service established a novel home and community testing service that was central to the national COVID-19 screening programme. This service was overseen by a multidisciplinary response room. This research examined the response room service, particularly areas that performed well and areas requiring improvement, using a quality improvement (QI) framework.

designThis was a qualitative study comprising semi-structured, individual interviews. Maximum variation sampling was used. The data were analysed using an established thematic analysis procedure. The analysis was guided by the framework, which comprised six QI drivers.

settingResponse room employees, including clinicians, dispatchers and administrators, were interviewed via telephone.

resultsLeadership for quality: participants valued person-oriented leadership, including regular, open communication and consultation with staff. Person/family engagement: participants endeavoured to provide patient-centred care. Formal patient feedback mechanisms and shared decision-making could be beneficial in the future. Staff engagement: working in a response room could affect well-being, though it also provided networking and learning opportunities. Staff require support and teambuilding. Use of improvement methods: improvements were made in a relatively informal, ad hoc manner. The use of robust methods based on improvement science was not reported. Measurement for quality: data were collected to improve efficiency and accuracy. More rigorous measurement would be beneficial, especially formally collecting stakeholder feedback. Governance for quality: close alignment with collaborators and clear communication with staff are essential. Information and communications technology for quality: this seventh driver was added because the importance of information technology specially designed for pandemics was frequently highlighted.

conclusionsThe study provides insights on what worked well and what required improvement in a pandemic response room. It can inform health services, particularly emergency services, in their preparation for additional COVID-19 waves, as well as future crises.

Indexed as

COVID-19PandemicsAmbulancesHumansQualitative ResearchQuality ImprovementSARS-CoV-2COVID-19qualitative researchquality in health care

Identifiers

PMID35039304
PMCPMC8765025

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.