 |
 |

Optimizing the Science of Quality Improvement
Eric David Peterson, MD, MPH
JAMA. 2005;294:369-371.
 |
 |
| Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text and any section headings. |
|
 |
 |
Physicians should always strive to optimize the form and intensity of interventions used in medical care and to find an ideal strategy that maximizes therapeutic benefits while minimizing adverse consequences and costs. With regard to pharmacological intervention, optimization of process is usually accomplished by comparison of varying drug combinations and drug doses in formal randomized clinical trials. In a similar manner, quality improvement (QI) interventions should also be tested and optimized through rigorously designed evaluations. And, as with drug therapy, it is important to define the form of intervention and the intensity required to effectively and efficiently improve care practices.
In this issue of JAMA, Beck and colleagues1 provide an important evaluation of one such QI strategy. The AFFECT trial (Administrative Data Feedback for Effective Cardiac Treatment) assessed whether a one-time hospital feedback report could motivate clinicians to voluntarily increase their use of proven . . . [Full Text of this Article]
Author Affiliation: Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC.
CiteULike Connotea Del.icio.us Digg Reddit Technorati Twitter
What's this?
RELATED ARTICLE
Administrative Data Feedback for Effective Cardiac Treatment: AFFECT, A Cluster Randomized Trial
, , , and
JAMA. ;294():309-317.
FULL TEXT
THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN CITED BY OTHER ARTICLES
Quality: The Mayo Clinic Approach
Swensen et al.
American Journal of Medical Quality 2009;24:428-440.
ABSTRACT
Why new guidelines for reporting improvement research? And why now?
Stevens
Qual Saf Health Care 2005;14:314-314.
FULL TEXT
Can Report Cards Improve MI Care?
Journal Watch Cardiology 2005;2005:2-2.
FULL TEXT
|