ArticleBMJ open quality2025
Implementing a Rapid Improvement Event with anonymised individual performance reporting on benign hysterectomy care: a retrospective comparative analysis.
Article in BMJ open quality, 2025. 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionValue-Based Healthcare (VBHC) aims to enhance patient outcomes while managing costs. Building on VBHC principles, the Ministry of Health Singapore introduced the Value-Driven Care programme, including initiatives like Enhanced Recovery After Surgery and Patient Blood Management. However, clinical quality remained suboptimal despite these measures due to limited clinician performance transparency. To address this, the Office of Value-Based Healthcare led a Rapid Improvement Event that implemented Individual Clinical Reports (ICRs) to provide clinicians with performance feedback. This study hypothesises that an active feedback loop using ICRs, combined with regular departmental dashboard reviews, would improve clinical quality, measured by the Clinical Quality Index (CQI).
methodsA quasi-experimental design compared pre-ICR and post-ICR implementation data, analysing improvements using Fisher's exact tests and logistic regression. Adjustments were made for multiple variables such as comorbidities, surgery type and American Society of Anesthesiologists classification.
resultsICR implementation significantly improved CQI performance (p=0.013) and reduced blood transfusion (p=0.046). Secondary outcomes, including length of stay, complications and readmission rates, also showed improvements with trends towards significance.
conclusionAn active feedback loop consisting of ICRs and multidisciplinary team discussions enhanced CQI for hysterectomy patients at a tertiary hospital in Singapore. They represent a valuable feedback tool with the potential to improve care quality in other standardised surgeries.
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.