Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38153764›Full record

ArticleInternational journal for quality in health care : journal of the International Society for Quality in Health Care2024

Effects of a team Quality Improvement method in a national clinical audit programme of four clinical specialties in Ministry of Health hospitals in Saudi Arabia.

Saleh Alghamdi, Nancy Dixon, Fahmi Al-Senani, Zohair Al Aseri, Shukri Al Saif, Talal AlTahan

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal for quality in health care : journal of the International Society for Quality in Health Care, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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

6 authors.

Saleh AlghamdiClinical Excellence General Directorate, Ministry of Health, Riyadh 14726, Saudi Arabia.ORCID 0000-0002-7545-7852
Nancy DixonHealthcare Quality Quest, Shelley Farm, Shelley Lane, Ower, Romsey, Hampshire SO51 6AS, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-1622-7723
Fahmi Al-SenaniStroke Saudi Clinical Expert Group, Model of Care Programme, Ministry of Health, Riyadh 11525, Saudi Arabia.
Zohair Al AseriSepsis Saudi Clinical Expert Group, Departments of Emergency and Critical Care, College of Medicine, King Saud University and Department of Clinical Sciences, College of Medicine, Riyadh Hospital, Dar Al Uloom University, Adult ICU services, Ministry of Health, Riyadh 145111, Saudi Arabia.
Shukri Al SaifMyocardial Infarction Saudi Clinical Expert Group, Eastern Health Cluster, Saudi Al-Babtain Cardiac Centre, Qatif, Dammam 32632, Saudi Arabia.
Talal AlTahanMajor Trauma Saudi Clinical Expert Group, Prince Mohammed Bin Abdulaziz Hospital, Riyadh 14214, Saudi Arabia.

Funding

Health Holding Company
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In 2018, the Ministry of Health (MoH) in Saudi Arabia developed a clinical excellence strategy. An objective was to reduce variation in clinical practices in MoH hospitals, particularly for conditions with high mortality in Saudi Arabia, by applying best practice clinical standards and using the clinical audit process to measure clinical practice. The strategy included working with multiprofessional teams in hospitals to implement improvements needed in clinical practice. To test the feasibility of carrying out national clinical audits in MoH hospitals, audits were carried out in 16 MoH hospitals on four clinical subjects-acute myocardial infarction, major trauma, sepsis, and stroke. Clinical expert groups, including Saudi clinicians and an international clinical expert, developed clinical care standards for the four conditions from analyses of international and Saudi clinical guidelines. The audits were designed with the expert groups. Multiprofessional teams were appointed to carry out the audits in designated MoH hospitals. Data collectors in each hospital were trained to collect data. Workshops were held with the teams on the clinical care standards and how data would be collected for the audits, and later, on the findings of data collection and how to use the improvement process to implement changes to improve compliance with the standards. After 4 months, data collection was repeated to determine if compliance with the clinical care standards had improved. Data collected from each hospital for both cycles of data collection were independently reliably tested. All designated hospitals participated in the audits, collecting and submitting data for two rounds of data collection and implementing improvement plans after the first round of data collection. All hospitals made substantial improvements in clinical practices. Of a total of 84 measures used to assess compliance with a total of 52 clinical care standards for the four clinical conditions, improvements were made by hospital teams in 58 (69.1%) measures. Improvements were statistically significant for 34 (40.5%) measures. The project demonstrated that well-designed and executed audits using evidence-based clinical care standards can result in substantial improvements in clinical practices in MoH hospitals in Saudi Arabia. Keys to success were the improvement methodology built into the audit process and the requirement for hospitals to appoint multiprofessional teams to carry out the audits. The approach adds to evidence on the effectiveness of clinical audits in achieving improvements in clinical quality and can be replicated in national audit programmes.

Indexed as

HospitalsQuality ImprovementClinical AuditHumansSaudi ArabiaStandard of Careclinical care standardsnational clinical auditquality improvementquality improvement methodologiesteamwork

Identifiers

PMID38153764
PMCPMC10842466

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.