Design and evaluation of an interactive quality dashboard for national clinical audit data: a realist evaluation

National audits aim to reduce variations in quality by stimulating quality improvement. However, varying provider engagement with audit data means that this is not being realised. The aim of the study was to develop and evaluate a quality dashboard (i.e. QualDash) to support clinical teams’ and managers’ use of national audit data. The study was a realist evaluation and biography of artefacts study. The study involved five NHS acute trusts. In phase 1, we developed a theory of national audits through interviews. Data use was supported by data access, audit staff skilled to produce data visualisations, data timeliness and quality, and the importance of perceived metrics. Data were mainly used by clinical teams. Organisational-level staff questioned the legitimacy of national audits. In phase 2, QualDash was co-designed and the QualDash theory was developed. QualDash provides interactive customisable visualisations to enable the exploration of relationships between variables. Locating QualDash on site servers gave users control of data upload frequency. In phase 3, we developed an adoption strategy through focus groups. ‘Champions’, awareness-raising through e-bulletins and demonstrations, and quick reference tools were agreed. In phase 4, we tested the QualDash theory using a mixed-methods evaluation. Constraints on use were metric configurations that did not match users’ expectations, affecting champions’ willingness to promote QualDash, and limited computing resources. Easy customisability supported use. The greatest use was where data use was previously constrained. In these contexts, report preparation time was reduced and efforts to improve data quality were supported, although the interrupted time series analysis did not show improved data quality. Twenty-three questionnaires were returned, revealing positive perceptions of ease of use and usefulness. In phase 5, the feasibility of conducting a cluster randomised controlled trial of QualDash was assessed. Interviews were undertaken to understand how QualDash could be revised to support a region-wide Gold Command. Requirements included multiple real-time data sources and functionality to help to identify priorities. Audits seeking to widen engagement may find the following strategies beneficial: involving a range of professional groups in choosing metrics; real-time reporting; presenting ‘headline’ metrics important to organisational-level staff; using routinely collected clinical data to populate data fields; and dashboards that help staff to explore and report audit data. Those designing dashboards may find it beneficial to include the following: ‘at a glance’ visualisation of key metrics; visualisations configured in line with existing visualisations that teams use, with clear labelling; functionality that supports the creation of reports and presentations; the ability to explore relationships between variables and drill down to look at subgroups; and low requirements for computing resources. Organisations introducing a dashboard may find the following strategies beneficial: clinical champion to promote use; testing with real data by audit staff; establishing routines for integrating use into work practices; involving audit staff in adoption activities; and allowing customisation. The COVID-19 pandemic stopped phase 4 data collection, limiting our ability to further test and refine the QualDash theory. Questionnaire results should be treated with caution because of the small, possibly biased, sample. Control sites for the interrupted time series analysis were not possible because of research and development delays. One intervention site did not submit data. Limited uptake meant that assessing the impact on more measures was not appropriate. The extent to which national audit dashboards are used and the strategies national audits use to encourage uptake, a realist review of the impact of dashboards, and rigorous evaluations of the impact of dashboards and the effectiveness of adoption strategies should be explored. This study is registered as ISRCTN18289782. This project was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health and Social Care Delivery Research programme and will be published in full in Health and Social Care Delivery Research; Vol. 10, No. 12. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

[1]  G. Bates,et al.  Complex interventions , 2022, International Review of Sport and Exercise Psychology.

[2]  R. Ruddle,et al.  Hidden labour: the skilful work of clinical audit data collection and its implications for secondary use of data via integrated health IT , 2021, BMC Health Services Research.

[3]  P. Doherty,et al.  Exploring variation in the use of feedback from national clinical audits: a realist investigation , 2020, BMC Health Services Research.

[4]  Roy A. Ruddle,et al.  QualDash: Adaptable Generation of Visualisation Dashboards for Healthcare Quality Improvement , 2020, IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics.

[5]  P. Doherty,et al.  Institutional use of National Clinical Audits by healthcare providers. , 2020, Journal of evaluation in clinical practice.

[6]  Nancy J. Lightner,et al.  Development, implementation and user experience of the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) dialysis dashboard , 2020, BMC Nephrology.

[7]  Alexandra Businger,et al.  Use, Perceived Usability, and Barriers to Implementation of a Patient Safety Dashboard Integrated within a Vendor EHR , 2020, Applied Clinical Informatics.

[8]  K. Owen,et al.  Using data to improve the care of people with diabetes across Oxfordshire , 2020, Practical Diabetes.

[9]  Jorie M. Butler,et al.  Decreases in antimicrobial use associated with multihospital implementation of electronic antimicrobial stewardship tools. , 2019, Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America.

[10]  S. Fenton,et al.  Evidence-based Operations Management in Health Information Management: A Case Study. , 2019, Perspectives in health information management.

[11]  Paul Murdock,et al.  Usability Testing of an Interactive Dashboard for Surgical Quality Improvement in a Large Congenital Heart Center , 2019, Applied Clinical Informatics.

[12]  C. Gale,et al.  The Myocardial Ischaemia National Audit Project (MINAP) , 2019 .

[13]  Ali Jalali,et al.  Quality Initiative Using Theory of Change and Visual Analytics to Improve Controlled Substance Documentation Discrepancies in the Operating Room , 2019, Applied Clinical Informatics.

[14]  T. Valente,et al.  Involving end-users in the design of an audit and feedback intervention in the emergency department setting – a mixed methods study , 2019, BMC Health Services Research.

[15]  Benjamin Brown,et al.  Clinical Performance Feedback Intervention Theory (CP-FIT): a new theory for designing, implementing, and evaluating feedback in health care based on a systematic review and meta-synthesis of qualitative research , 2019, Implementation Science.

[16]  Y. van Eijk-Hustings,et al.  Development, usability and acceptability of an integrated eHealth system for spondyloarthritis in the Netherlands (SpA-Net) , 2019, RMD Open.

[17]  J. Grimshaw,et al.  Use of a maternal newborn audit and feedback system in Ontario: a collective case study , 2019, BMJ Quality & Safety.

[18]  Alex Endert,et al.  A Heuristic Approach to Value-Driven Evaluation of Visualizations , 2019, IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics.

[19]  David Russell,et al.  Using Feedback Intervention Theory to Guide Clinical Dashboard Design , 2018, AMIA.

[20]  A. Okpani,et al.  Data for decision making: using a dashboard to strengthen routine immunisation in Nigeria , 2018, BMJ Global Health.

[21]  J. Merrill,et al.  The Development of Heuristics for Evaluation of Dashboard Visualizations , 2018, Applied Clinical Informatics.

[22]  Anita Stern,et al.  A realist evaluation of value-based care delivery in home care: The influence of actors, autonomy and accountability. , 2018, Social science & medicine.

[23]  Rebecca Randell,et al.  Quality and safety between ward and board: a biography of artefacts study , 2018, Health Services and Delivery Research.

[24]  Riccardo Bellazzi,et al.  A dashboard-based system for supporting diabetes care , 2018, J. Am. Medical Informatics Assoc..

[25]  James D. Harrison,et al.  Next-generation audit and feedback for inpatient quality improvement using electronic health record data: a cluster randomised controlled trial , 2018, BMJ Quality & Safety.

[26]  N. D. de Keizer,et al.  Health professionals’ perceptions about their clinical performance and the influence of audit and feedback on their intentions to improve practice: a theory-based study in Dutch intensive care units , 2018, Implementation Science.

[27]  J. Grimshaw,et al.  Effect of a population-level performance dashboard intervention on maternal-newborn outcomes: an interrupted time series study , 2017, BMJ Quality & Safety.

[28]  Long D Trinh,et al.  Impact of a quality‐assessment dashboard on the comprehensive review of pharmacist performance , 2017, American journal of health-system pharmacy : AJHP : official journal of the American Society of Health-System Pharmacists.

[29]  P. Ramnarayan,et al.  Outcomes for Children Receiving Noninvasive Ventilation as the First-Line Mode of Mechanical Ventilation at Intensive Care Admission: A Propensity Score-Matched Cohort Study* , 2017, Critical care medicine.

[30]  Jesse M. Ehrenfeld,et al.  Compliance Is Contagious: Using Informatics Methods to Measure the Spread of a Documentation Standard From a Preoperative Clinic , 2017, Journal of perianesthesia nursing : official journal of the American Society of PeriAnesthesia Nurses.

[31]  R. Kerns,et al.  Impact of the Opioid Safety Initiative on opioid-related prescribing in veterans , 2017, Pain.

[32]  Michael Fowler,et al.  An informatics-based approach to reducing heart failure all-cause readmissions: the Stanford heart failure dashboard , 2017, J. Am. Medical Informatics Assoc..

[33]  S. Buttigieg,et al.  Can hospital dashboards provide visibility of information from bedside to board? A case study approach. , 2017, Journal of health organization and management.

[34]  R. Buckingham,et al.  Improving quality of care through national clinical audit , 2016, Future Hospital Journal.

[35]  P. Rogers,et al.  Using realist action research for service redesign , 2016 .

[36]  D. Allen The importance, challenges and prospects of taking work practices into account for healthcare quality improvement. , 2016, Journal of health organization and management.

[37]  Graham Moore,et al.  Realist complex intervention science: Applying realist principles across all phases of the Medical Research Council framework for developing and evaluating complex interventions , 2016, Evaluation.

[38]  A. Manzano,et al.  The craft of interviewing in realist evaluation , 2016 .

[39]  Aziz Sheikh,et al.  Taxonomy of delays in the implementation of hospital computerized physician order entry and clinical decision support systems for prescribing: a longitudinal qualitative study , 2016, BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making.

[40]  Jenny Neuburger,et al.  How is feedback from national clinical audits used? Views from English National Health Service trust audit leads , 2016, Journal of health services research & policy.

[41]  M. Fredriksson,et al.  Depicting the interplay between organisational tiers in the use of a national quality registry to develop quality of care in Sweden , 2015, BMC Health Services Research.

[42]  S. Michie,et al.  Using realist review to inform intervention development: methodological illustration and conceptual platform for collaborative care in offender mental health , 2015, Implementation Science.

[43]  M. Dixon-Woods,et al.  Professionalism Redundant, Reshaped, or Reinvigorated? Realizing the “Third Logic” in Contemporary Health Care , 2015, Journal of health and social behavior.

[44]  B. D. De Stavola,et al.  The Impact of a National Clinician-led Audit Initiative on Care and Mortality after Hip Fracture in England , 2015, Medical care.

[45]  Jorge A. Gálvez,et al.  Optimization of drug-drug interaction alert rules in a pediatric hospital's electronic health record system using a visual analytics dashboard , 2015, J. Am. Medical Informatics Assoc..

[46]  Joseph Finkelstein,et al.  Use of provider-level dashboards and pay-for-performance in venous thromboembolism prophylaxis. , 2015, Journal of hospital medicine.

[47]  Geraldine Fitzpatrick,et al.  Dashboards for improving patient care: Review of the literature , 2015, Int. J. Medical Informatics.

[48]  Susan Michie,et al.  Demystifying theory and its use in improvement , 2015, BMJ quality & safety.

[49]  Jeffrey M. Ashburner,et al.  An Interactive, All-Payer, Multidomain Primary Care Performance Dashboard , 2014, The Journal of ambulatory care management.

[50]  Heather Campbell,et al.  Insights from staff nurses and managers on unit-specific nursing performance dashboards: a qualitative study , 2014, BMJ quality & safety.

[51]  Jeremy M. Grimshaw,et al.  Growing Literature, Stagnant Science? Systematic Review, Meta-Regression and Cumulative Analysis of Audit and Feedback Interventions in Health Care , 2014, Journal of General Internal Medicine.

[52]  Jon Hindmarsh,et al.  Integration of robotic surgery into routine practice and impacts on communication, collaboration, and decision making: a realist process evaluation protocol , 2014, Implementation Science.

[53]  Paul Haidet,et al.  Examining Clinical Performance Feedback in Patient-Aligned Care Teams , 2014, Journal of General Internal Medicine.

[54]  Susan Michie,et al.  No more ‘business as usual’ with audit and feedback interventions: towards an agenda for a reinvigorated intervention , 2014, Implementation Science.

[55]  Heidrun Schumann,et al.  A Design Space of Visualization Tasks , 2013, IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics.

[56]  T. Munzner,et al.  A Multi-Level Typology of Abstract Visualization Tasks , 2013, IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics.

[57]  M. Dixon-Woods,et al.  Between surveillance and subjectification: professionals and the governance of quality and patient safety in English hospitals. , 2013, Social science & medicine.

[58]  A. Rudd,et al.  National sentinel stroke audit 1998-2011. , 2013, Clinical medicine.

[59]  Staffan Furusten Institutional Theory and Organizational Change , 2013 .

[60]  S. Turner,et al.  Governing patient safety: lessons learned from a mixed methods evaluation of implementing a ward-level medication safety scorecard in two English NHS hospitals , 2013, BMJ quality & safety.

[61]  R. Halfens,et al.  A feedback system to improve the quality of nutritional care. , 2013, Nutrition.

[62]  K. Clark,et al.  Breaking the mould without breaking the system: the development and pilot of a clinical dashboard at The Prince Charles Hospital. , 2013, Australian health review : a publication of the Australian Hospital Association.

[63]  J. Hodson,et al.  Missed medication doses in hospitalised patients: a descriptive account of quality improvement measures and time series analysis , 2013, International journal for quality in health care : journal of the International Society for Quality in Health Care.

[64]  Paul D Baxter,et al.  An assessment of composite measures of hospital performance and associated mortality for patients with acute myocardial infarction. Analysis of individual hospital performance and outcome for the National Institute for Cardiovascular Outcomes Research (NICOR) , 2013, European heart journal. Acute cardiovascular care.

[65]  I. James,et al.  Clinical dashboard: use in older adult mental health wards , 2013 .

[66]  Edward T. Cokely,et al.  Individual Differences in Graph Literacy: Overcoming Denominator Neglect in Risk Comprehension , 2012 .

[67]  Elizabeth Murray,et al.  From theory to 'measurement' in complex interventions: Methodological lessons from the development of an e-health normalisation instrument , 2012, BMC Medical Research Methodology.

[68]  W. Gaissmaier,et al.  Numbers can be worth a thousand pictures: individual differences in understanding graphical and numerical representations of health-related information. , 2012, Health psychology : official journal of the Division of Health Psychology, American Psychological Association.

[69]  Ray Pawson,et al.  A realist diagnostic workshop , 2012 .

[70]  Jason Dykes,et al.  Human-Centered Approaches in Geovisualization Design: Investigating Multiple Methods Through a Long-Term Case Study , 2011, IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics.

[71]  Peter J Pronovost,et al.  Explaining Michigan: developing an ex post theory of a quality improvement program. , 2011, The Milbank quarterly.

[72]  Andrew Georgiou,et al.  A realist evaluation of the role of communities of practice in changing healthcare practice , 2011, Implementation science : IS.

[73]  Blackford Middleton,et al.  Electronic health record feedback to improve antibiotic prescribing for acute respiratory infections. , 2010, The American journal of managed care.

[74]  Robin Williams,et al.  e-Infrastructures: How Do We Know and Understand Them? Strategic Ethnography and the Biography of Artefacts , 2010, Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW).

[75]  Robert L. Wears,et al.  Health information technology: fallacies and sober realities , 2010, J. Am. Medical Informatics Assoc..

[76]  Joseph W. Alba,et al.  Heuristics and Biases in Data-Based Decision Making: Effects of Experience, Training, and Graphical Data Displays , 2010 .

[77]  L. Smeeth,et al.  The Myocardial Ischaemia National Audit Project (MINAP) , 2010, Heart.

[78]  B. Karsh,et al.  The Technology Acceptance Model: Its past and its future in health care , 2010, J. Biomed. Informatics.

[79]  Anam Parand,et al.  Studying large-scale programmes to improve patient safety in whole care systems: challenges for research. , 2009, Social Science & Medicine (1967).

[80]  Bruce H. Clark,et al.  Dashboards & Marketing: Why, What, How and What Research is Needed? , 2009 .

[81]  Trisha Greenhalgh,et al.  How do you modernize a health service? A realist evaluation of whole-scale transformation in london. , 2009, The Milbank quarterly.

[82]  C. May,et al.  Implementing, Embedding, and Integrating Practices: An Outline of Normalization Process Theory , 2009 .

[83]  Jennie Popay,et al.  Testing Methodological Guidance on the Conduct of Narrative Synthesis in Systematic Reviews , 2009 .

[84]  R. Byng,et al.  Exposing the key functions of a complex intervention for shared care in mental health: case study of a process evaluation , 2008, BMC health services research.

[85]  Robin Williams,et al.  Software and Organisations: The Biography of the Enterprise-Wide System or How SAP Conquered the World , 2008 .

[86]  G. Bevan Changing paradigms of governance and regulation of quality of healthcare in England , 2008 .

[87]  J. Waring Adaptive regulation or governmentality: patient safety and the changing regulation of medicine. , 2007, Sociology of health & illness.

[88]  N. Brooks,et al.  Has the publication of cardiac surgery outcome data been associated with changes in practice in northwest England: an analysis of 25 730 patients undergoing CABG surgery under 30 surgeons over eight years , 2007, Heart.

[89]  M. Eccles,et al.  Planning and Studying Improvement in Patient Care: The Use of Theoretical Perspectives , 2007, The Milbank quarterly.

[90]  D. Haslam What is the Healthcare Commission trying to achieve? , 2007, Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine.

[91]  Jacqueline A Pugh,et al.  Audit and feedback and clinical practice guideline adherence: Making feedback actionable , 2006, Implementation science : IS.

[92]  Sunil Sinha,et al.  Hospital Boards and Quality Dashboards , 2006 .

[93]  R Baker,et al.  What do we know about how to do audit and feedback? Pitfalls in applying evidence from a systematic review , 2005, BMC health services research.

[94]  Sandra Tillema,et al.  In Search of a Benchmarking Theory for the Public Sector , 2005 .

[95]  J. Birkhead,et al.  Post-traumatic focal true left ventricular aneurysm , 2004, Heart.

[96]  Rob Procter,et al.  The benefits of a long engagement: from contextual design to the co-realisation of work affording artefacts , 2002, NordiCHI '02.

[97]  J. Øvretveit,et al.  Evaluation of quality improvement programmes , 2002, Quality & safety in health care.

[98]  J. Birkhead Responding to the requirements of the National Service Framework for coronary disease: a core data set for myocardial infarction , 2000, Heart.

[99]  R. Pawson Theorizing the interview , 1996 .

[100]  O. Carney,et al.  The use of the Nominal Group Technique in research with community nurses. , 1996, Journal of advanced nursing.

[101]  Robert A. Virzi,et al.  Refining the Test Phase of Usability Evaluation: How Many Subjects Is Enough? , 1992 .

[102]  Iris Vessey,et al.  Cognitive Fit: A Theory‐Based Analysis of the Graphs Versus Tables Literature* , 1991 .

[103]  Simon de Lusignan,et al.  Uptake of a Dashboard Designed to Give Realtime Feedback to a Sentinel Network About Key Data Required for Influenza Vaccine Effectiveness Studies , 2018, MIE.

[104]  Sooyoung Yoo,et al.  A novel concept for integrating and delivering health information using a comprehensive digital dashboard: An analysis of healthcare professionals' intention to adopt a new system and the trend of its real usage , 2017, Int. J. Medical Informatics.

[105]  Rebecca Randell,et al.  Managing Quality and Safety in Real Time? Evidence from an Interview Study , 2016, MIE.

[106]  R. Logie,et al.  When a graph is poorer than 100 words: A comparison of computerised natural language generation, human generated descriptions and graphical displays in neonatal intensive care , 2010 .

[107]  Ray Pawson,et al.  Evidence-based policy: a realist perspective. , 2006 .

[108]  Manuel Riemer,et al.  CFIT: A System to Provide a Continuous Quality Improvement Infrastructure Through Organizational Responsiveness, Measurement, Training, and Feedback , 2006 .

[109]  A. Georgiou,et al.  The National Audit of Myocardial Infarction: a new development in the audit process , 2003 .

[110]  Bill Cunningham,et al.  Implementation Science Implementation Science What's in a Mechanism? Development of a Key Concept in Realist Evaluation What's in a Mechanism? Development of a Key Concept in Realist Evaluation , 2022 .

[111]  S. Iliffe,et al.  This Work Is Licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 2.0 Generic License Designing a Complex Intervention for Dementia Case Management in Primary Care , 2022 .