Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Comparative Study
. 2012 Mar 21:7:21.
doi: 10.1186/1748-5908-7-21.

Methods for the guideline-based development of quality indicators--a systematic review

Thomas Kötter  1 , Eva Blozik, Martin Scherer
Affiliations
Comparative Study

Methods for the guideline-based development of quality indicators--a systematic review

Thomas Kötter et al. Implement Sci. .

Abstract

Background: Quality indicators (QIs) are used in many healthcare settings to measure, compare, and improve quality of care. For the efficient development of high-quality QIs, rigorous, approved, and evidence-based development methods are needed. Clinical practice guidelines are a suitable source to derive QIs from, but no gold standard for guideline-based QI development exists. This review aims to identify, describe, and compare methodological approaches to guideline-based QI development.

Methods: We systematically searched medical literature databases (Medline, EMBASE, and CINAHL) and grey literature. Two researchers selected publications reporting methodological approaches to guideline-based QI development. In order to describe and compare methodological approaches used in these publications, we extracted detailed information on common steps of guideline-based QI development (topic selection, guideline selection, extraction of recommendations, QI selection, practice test, and implementation) to predesigned extraction tables.

Results: From 8,697 hits in the database search and several grey literature documents, we selected 48 relevant references. The studies were of heterogeneous type and quality. We found no randomized controlled trial or other studies comparing the ability of different methodological approaches to guideline-based development to generate high-quality QIs. The relevant publications featured a wide variety of methodological approaches to guideline-based QI development, especially regarding guideline selection and extraction of recommendations. Only a few studies reported patient involvement.

Conclusions: Further research is needed to determine which elements of the methodological approaches identified, described, and compared in this review are best suited to constitute a gold standard for guideline-based QI development. For this research, we provide a comprehensive groundwork.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Flowchart summarizing the screening process.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Overview of the process of guideline-based QI development.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Methodological variability of guideline-based QI development.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Baker R, Fraser RC. Development of review criteria: linking guidelines and assessment of quality. BMJ. 1995;311:370–373. doi: 10.1136/bmj.311.7001.370. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Lohr KN. Medicare: a strategy for quality assurance. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press; 1990. - PubMed
    1. Brook RH, McGlynn EA, Cleary PD. Quality of health care. Part 2: measuring quality of care. N Eng J Med. 1996;335:966–970. doi: 10.1056/NEJM199609263351311. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Donabedian A. Evaluating the quality of medical care (1966) Milbank Q. 2005;83:691–729. doi: 10.1111/j.1468-0009.2005.00397.x. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Mainz J. Quality indicators: essential for quality improvement. Int J Qual Health Care. 2004;16:i1–i2. doi: 10.1093/intqhc/mzh036. - DOI - PubMed

MeSH terms