ArticleBMJ open quality2025
Strategies for optimising health system managers' engagement in quality improvement projects: lessons learnt from the COMPAS+ project.
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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundQuality improvement strategies are used in healthcare to enhance the quality, safety and efficiency of service delivery. While the involvement of managers is considered critical, their roles remain underdocumented. This study examines the roles of managers in COMPAS+, a quality improvement collaborative conceived to enhance chronic disease care in Quebec, Canada. It explores managers' specific contributions to quality improvement projects to deepen understanding of effective managerial engagement.
methodsThis qualitative case study compares the roles played by managers (health network directors, division managers and local service network and family medicine group directors) within four regional health networks that participated in COMPAS+ from 2016 to 2019. Deductive and inductive thematic analysis of workshop reports, action plans and interviews with 24 key actors was performed, informed by a recent scoping review of decision-makers' roles in quality improvement projects and project management literature.
resultsThe study revealed variability in project management across cases, particularly in the distribution of responsibility among upper, middle and lower management. Upper management provided strategic direction, middle management oversaw project execution and bridged organisational tiers, while lower management coordinated local change efforts. Middle managers were tasked with project management but often lacked role clarity and training. A significant gap was found in methodological guidance, typically provided by a quality improvement facilitator. This gap hindered projects' potential and, in some cases, led to deviations from the intended quality improvement model.
conclusionsEffective quality improvement project management requires well-defined managerial roles, training and communication between management levels. Our findings highlight the importance of integrating a facilitator role to provide methodological expertise and ensure adherence to quality improvement processes. Contextual expertise and local change leadership may be complemented by external quality improvement expertise. These insights lay the groundwork for future research on evidence-based strategies for effective project management.
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.