Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40795231›Full record

ArticleInternational journal for quality in health care : journal of the International Society for Quality in Health Care2025

Using FRAM visualisations in quality improvement projects: identifying and testing strategies to improve anticoagulant use in the perioperative process.

Nienke M Luijcks, Annelies Visser, Dave A Dongelmans, Dimmy M G van Dongen, Erin L de Graaf, Jop Groeneweg, Maarten J van der Laan, Perla J Marang-van de Mheen, FIAF Study Group

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal for quality in health care : journal of the International Society for Quality in Health Care, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

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

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

  1. Pooled it
  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

9 authors.

Nienke M LuijcksDepartment of Safety & Security Science, Delft University of Technology, Mekelweg 5, Delft, 2628 CD, The Netherlands.ORCID 0009-0005-2404-4811
Annelies VisserDepartment of Surgery, Amsterdam University Medical Centre, Meibergdreef 9, Amsterdam, 1105 AZ, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0001-7102-2627
Dave A DongelmansDepartment of Intensive Care Medicine, Amsterdam University Medical Centre, Amsterdam Public Health (APH), Meibergdreef 9, Amsterdam, 1105 AZ, The Netherlands.
Dimmy M G van DongenDepartment of Safety & Security Science, Delft University of Technology, Mekelweg 5, Delft, 2628 CD, The Netherlands.
Erin L de GraafDepartment of Safety & Security Science, Delft University of Technology, Mekelweg 5, Delft, 2628 CD, The Netherlands.
Jop GroenewegDepartment of Safety & Security Science, Delft University of Technology, Mekelweg 5, Delft, 2628 CD, The Netherlands.
Maarten J van der LaanDepartment of Surgery, University Medical Centre Groningen, Hanzeplein 1, Groningen, 9713 GZ, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-3125-1342
Perla J Marang-van de MheenDepartment of Safety & Security Science, Delft University of Technology, Mekelweg 5, Delft, 2628 CD, The Netherlands.
FIAF Study Group

Funding

Netherlands Organisation for Health Research and Development 10130022010003
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTo improve healthcare processes, gaining a thorough understanding of the work is important. The Functional Resonance Analysis Method (FRAM) is a method that can be used for this purpose by visualising how different steps in a process interact. However, little research is available on the use and feasibility of FRAM in quality improvement studies. Therefore, the objective of this study is to assess the feasibility of using FRAM visualisations in a quality improvement study to identify, formulate and test improvement strategies regarding anticoagulant use in the perioperative process in two Dutch University Medical Centres.

methodsThrough multiple Plan-Do-Study-Act cycles, FRAM visualisations of work-as-imagined and work-as-done were created, which were validated and discussed with healthcare professionals through focus groups. Improvement suggestions were collected as input for improvement strategies from frontline clinicians. These strategies were tested and evaluated using questionnaires and interviews. The interviews were analysed using content analysis to further explore the value of the FRAM visualisations for identifying and employing improvement strategies.

resultsThe FRAM visualisations were perceived as confusing by professionals given their limited knowledge of FRAM, and it was time-intensive to identify possible improvements in the perioperative process. Using a simplified visualisation that showed the key FRAM information resulted in multiple improvement suggestions which were successfully tested as improvement strategies. The content analysis revealed three themes related to the use of FRAM: how care could be organised efficiently and safely, bringing stakeholders together to highlight the roles and responsibilities of professionals, and identifying how documentation of patient information is often scattered or incomplete.

conclusionsFRAM visualisations in quality improvement studies can provide valuable insights into the working process, which are also useful for formulating and testing improvement strategies. However, adjustments to the visualisations are necessary to enable professionals to participate in identifying improvement strategies.

Indexed as

AnticoagulantsPerioperative CareQuality ImprovementFocus GroupsHumansNetherlandsSurveys and QuestionnairesAnticoagulantsquality improvementrisk managementsystems science

Identifiers

PMID40795231
PMCPMC12419808

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.