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
. 2014 Apr;23(4):290-8.
doi: 10.1136/bmjqs-2013-001862. Epub 2013 Sep 11.

Systematic review of the application of the plan-do-study-act method to improve quality in healthcare

Michael J Taylor  1 , Chris McNicholas, Chris Nicolay, Ara Darzi, Derek Bell, Julie E Reed
Affiliations
Free PMC article

Systematic review of the application of the plan-do-study-act method to improve quality in healthcare

Michael J Taylor et al. BMJ Qual Saf. 2014 Apr.
Free PMC article

Abstract

Background: Plan-do-study-act (PDSA) cycles provide a structure for iterative testing of changes to improve quality of systems. The method is widely accepted in healthcare improvement; however there is little overarching evaluation of how the method is applied. This paper proposes a theoretical framework for assessing the quality of application of PDSA cycles and explores the consistency with which the method has been applied in peer-reviewed literature against this framework.

Methods: NHS Evidence and Cochrane databases were searched by three independent reviewers. Empirical studies were included that reported application of the PDSA method in healthcare. Application of PDSA cycles was assessed against key features of the method, including documentation characteristics, use of iterative cycles, prediction-based testing of change, initial small-scale testing and use of data over time.

Results: 73 of 409 individual articles identified met the inclusion criteria. Of the 73 articles, 47 documented PDSA cycles in sufficient detail for full analysis against the whole framework. Many of these studies reported application of the PDSA method that failed to accord with primary features of the method. Less than 20% (14/73) fully documented the application of a sequence of iterative cycles. Furthermore, a lack of adherence to the notion of small-scale change is apparent and only 15% (7/47) reported the use of quantitative data at monthly or more frequent data intervals to inform progression of cycles.

Discussion: To progress the development of the science of improvement, a greater understanding of the use of improvement methods, including PDSA, is essential to draw reliable conclusions about their effectiveness. This would be supported by the development of systematic and rigorous standards for the application and reporting of PDSAs.

Keywords: Implementation science; PDSA; Quality improvement; Quality improvement methodologies.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
The Model for Improvement; FOCUS.
Figure 2
Figure 2
PRISMA diagram.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Iterative nature of cycles for all articles and split by plan–do–check–act and plan–do–study–act terminology.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Comment in

  • Building knowledge, asking questions.
    Ogrinc G, Shojania KG. Ogrinc G, et al. BMJ Qual Saf. 2014 Apr;23(4):265-7. doi: 10.1136/bmjqs-2013-002703. Epub 2013 Dec 23. BMJ Qual Saf. 2014. PMID: 24365606 No abstract available.

References

    1. Øvretveit J. Does improving quality save money. A review of evidence of which improvements to quality reduce costs to health service providers. London: The Health Foundation, 2009
    1. Walshe K, Freeman T. Effectiveness of quality improvement: learning from evaluations. Qual Saf Health Care 2002;11:85–7 - PMC - PubMed
    1. Schouten LMT, Hulscher MEJL, van Everdingen JJE, et al. Evidence for the impact of quality improvement collaboratives: systematic review. BMJ 2008;336:1491–4 - PMC - PubMed
    1. Nicolay CR, Purkayastha S, Greenhalgh A, et al. Systematic review of the application of quality improvement methodologies from the manufacturing industry to surgical healthcare. Br J Surg 2012;99:324–35 - PubMed
    1. Berwick DM. Developing and testing changes in delivery of care. Ann Intern Med 1998;128:651–6 - PubMed

Publication types

MeSH terms