Mixed methods study protocol for combining stakeholder-led rapid evaluation with near real-time continuous registry data to facilitate evaluations of quality of care in intensive care units

Background: Improved access to healthcare in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) has not equated to improved health outcomes. Absence or unsustained quality of care is partly to blame. Improving outcomes in intensive care units (ICUs) requires delivery of complex interventions by multiple specialties working in concert, and the simultaneous prevention of avoidable harms associated with the illness and the treatment interventions. Therefore, successful design and implementation of improvement interventions requires understanding of the behavioural, organisational, and external factors that determine care delivery and the likelihood of achieving sustained improvement. We aim to identify care processes that contribute to suboptimal clinical outcomes in ICUs located in LMICs and to establish barriers and enablers for improving the care processes. Methods: Using rapid evaluation methods, we will use four data collection methods: 1) registry embedded indicators to assess quality of care processes and their associated outcomes; 2) process mapping to provide a preliminary framework to understand gaps between current and desired care practices; 3) structured observations of processes of interest identified from the process mapping and; 4) focus group discussions with stakeholders to identify barriers and enablers influencing the gap between current and desired care practices. We will also collect self-assessments of readiness for quality improvement. Data collection and analysis will be performed in parallel and through an iterative process across eight countries: Kenya, India, Malaysia, Nepal, Pakistan, South Africa, Uganda and Vietnam. Conclusions: The results of our study will provide essential information on where and how care processes can be improved to facilitate better quality of care to critically ill patients in LMICs; thus, reduce preventable mortality and morbidity in ICUs. Furthermore, understanding the rapid evaluation methods that will be used for this study will allow other researchers and healthcare professionals to carry out similar research in ICUs and other health services.

[1]  N. D. de Keizer,et al.  Development of a quality indicator set to measure and improve quality of ICU care in low- and middle-income countries , 2022, Intensive Care Medicine.

[2]  D. Lane,et al.  Healthcare provider and patient perspectives on access to and management of atrial fibrillation in the Northern Province, Sri Lanka: a rapid evaluation of barriers and facilitators to care , 2022, BMC Health Services Research.

[3]  Francisco M. Olmos-Vega,et al.  A practical guide to reflexivity in qualitative research: AMEE Guide No. 149 , 2022, Medical teacher.

[4]  Issrah Jawad,et al.  A scoping review of registry captured indicators for evaluating quality of critical care in ICU , 2021, Journal of Intensive Care.

[5]  J. Marshall,et al.  Operationalisation of the Randomized Embedded Multifactorial Adaptive Platform for COVID-19 trials in a low and lower-middle income critical care learning health system. , 2021, Wellcome open research.

[6]  A. Colman,et al.  Drivers of Broad-Spectrum Antibiotic Overuse across Diverse Hospital Contexts—A Qualitative Study of Prescribers in the UK, Sri Lanka and South Africa , 2021, Antibiotics.

[7]  Julie E. Reed,et al.  Process mapping in healthcare: a systematic review , 2020, BMC Health Services Research.

[8]  S. Tripathy,et al.  Performance evaluation of a multinational data platform for critical care in Asia. , 2021, Wellcome open research.

[9]  N. Adhikari,et al.  Implementing an intensive care registry in India: preliminary results of the case-mix program and an opportunity for quality improvement and research , 2020, Wellcome open research.

[10]  S. Murthy,et al.  Leveraging a Cloud-Based Critical Care Registry for COVID-19 Pandemic Surveillance and Research in Low- and Middle-Income Countries , 2020, JMIR public health and surveillance.

[11]  S. Harris,et al.  Establishing a critical care network in Asia to improve care for critically ill patients in low- and middle-income countries , 2020, Critical Care.

[12]  A. Beane,et al.  Validation of a simplified risk prediction model using a cloud based critical care registry in a lower-middle income country , 2020, PloS one.

[13]  Ginger A. Johnson,et al.  Rapid Techniques in Qualitative Research: A Critical Review of the Literature , 2020, Qualitative health research.

[14]  Steve Campbell,et al.  Purposive sampling: complex or simple? Research case examples , 2020, Journal of research in nursing : JRN.

[15]  U. Baker,et al.  How and under what circumstances do quality improvement collaboratives lead to better outcomes? A systematic review , 2020, Implementation Science.

[16]  C. Cairns,et al.  Nosocomial infections in the ICU , 2019, Anaesthesia & Intensive Care Medicine.

[17]  A. Dondorp,et al.  Addressing the information deficit in global health: lessons from a digital acute care platform in Sri Lanka , 2019, BMJ Global Health.

[18]  Signe Flottorp,et al.  Audit and feedback as a quality strategy , 2019 .

[19]  M. Kruk,et al.  Mortality due to low-quality health systems in the universal health coverage era: a systematic analysis of amenable deaths in 137 countries , 2018, The Lancet.

[20]  U. Baker,et al.  The global need for essential emergency and critical care , 2018, Critical Care.

[21]  Tanya Marchant,et al.  High-quality health systems in the Sustainable Development Goals era: time for a revolution , 2018, The Lancet. Global health.

[22]  A. Dondorp,et al.  Experiences of ICU survivors in a low middle income country- a multicenter study , 2018, BMC Anesthesiology.

[23]  J. Chiche,et al.  New perspectives to improve critical care benchmarking , 2018, Annals of Intensive Care.

[24]  Cecilia Vindrola-Padros,et al.  Quick and dirty? A systematic review of the use of rapid ethnographies in healthcare organisation and delivery , 2017, BMJ Quality & Safety.

[25]  Janet Diaz,et al.  A roadmap for acute care training of frontline Healthcare workers in LMICs , 2017, Journal of critical care.

[26]  Mayur B. Patel,et al.  The ABCDEF Bundle in Critical Care. , 2017, Critical care clinics.

[27]  E. Ely,et al.  Methods of pain assessment in adult intensive care unit patients - Polish version of the CPOT (Critical Care Pain Observation Tool) and BPS (Behavioral Pain Scale). , 2017, Anaesthesiology intensive therapy.

[28]  J. Hanefeld,et al.  Understanding and measuring quality of care: dealing with complexity , 2017, Bulletin of the World Health Organization.

[29]  M. Keegan,et al.  Understanding intensive care unit benchmarking , 2017, Intensive Care Medicine.

[30]  Paul Voigt,et al.  The EU General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) , 2017 .

[31]  K. Malterud,et al.  Sample Size in Qualitative Interview Studies , 2016, Qualitative health research.

[32]  Steven G. Johnson,et al.  A Harmonized Data Quality Assessment Terminology and Framework for the Secondary Use of Electronic Health Record Data , 2016, EGEMS.

[33]  Martin Utley,et al.  The role of embedded research in quality improvement: a narrative review , 2016, BMJ Quality & Safety.

[34]  N. Kissoon,et al.  Engaging Pediatric Intensive Care Unit (PICU) clinical staff to lead practice improvement: the PICU Participatory Action Research Project (PICU-PAR) , 2014, Implementation Science.

[35]  N. Gale,et al.  Using the framework method for the analysis of qualitative data in multi-disciplinary health research , 2013, BMC Medical Research Methodology.

[36]  Richard Baker,et al.  A checklist for identifying determinants of practice: A systematic review and synthesis of frameworks and taxonomies of factors that prevent or enable improvements in healthcare professional practice , 2013, Implementation Science.

[37]  P. Margolis,et al.  The Model for Understanding Success in Quality (MUSIQ): building a theory of context in healthcare quality improvement , 2011, BMJ quality & safety.

[38]  Phil Jones,et al.  The walking interview: Methodology, mobility and place , 2011 .

[39]  Joanna Smith,et al.  Qualitative data analysis: the framework approach. , 2011, Nurse researcher.

[40]  M. Strauss,et al.  Construct validity: advances in theory and methodology. , 2009, Annual review of clinical psychology.

[41]  R. Carpiano,et al.  Come take a walk with me: the "go-along" interview as a novel method for studying the implications of place for health and well-being. , 2009, Health & place.

[42]  Nicolette de Keizer,et al.  Cross-Mapping APACHE IV "Reasons for Intensive Care Admission" Classification to SNOMED CT , 2008, MIE.

[43]  Miguel P Caldas,et al.  Research design: qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches , 2003 .

[44]  Yu-Chu Shen,et al.  The effect of financial pressure on the quality of care in hospitals. , 2003, Journal of health economics.

[45]  C. Sessler,et al.  The Richmond Agitation-Sedation Scale: validity and reliability in adult intensive care unit patients. , 2002, American journal of respiratory and critical care medicine.

[46]  G. Bernard,et al.  The impact of delirium in the intensive care unit on hospital length of stay , 2001, Intensive Care Medicine.

[47]  M. Anker,et al.  Rapid evaluation methods (REM) of health services performance: methodological observations. , 1993, Bulletin of the World Health Organization.