Systematic approach to evaluating and confirming the utility of a suite of national health system performance (HSP) indicators in Canada: a modified Delphi study
- PMID: 28404612
- PMCID: PMC5775456
- DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2016-014772
Systematic approach to evaluating and confirming the utility of a suite of national health system performance (HSP) indicators in Canada: a modified Delphi study
Abstract
Objectives: Evaluating an existing suite of health system performance (HSP) indicators for continued reporting using a systematic criteria-based assessment and national consensus conference.
Design: Modified Delphi approach with technical and leadership groups, an online survey of stakeholders and convening a national consensus conference.
Setting: A national health information steward, the Canadian Institute for Health Information (CIHI).
Participants: A total of 73 participants, comprised 61 conference attendants/stakeholders from across Canada and 12 national health information steward staff.
Primary and secondary outcome measures: Indicator dispositions of retention, additional stakeholder consultation, further redevelopment or retirement.
Results: 4 dimensions (usability, importance, scientific soundness and feasibility) typically used to select measures for reporting were expanded to 18 criteria grouped under the 4 dimensions through a process of research and testing. Definitions for each criterion were developed and piloted. Once the definitions were established, 56 of CIHI's publicly reported HSP indicators were evaluated against the criteria using modified Delphi approaches. Of the 56 HSP indicators evaluated, 9 measures were ratified for retirement, 7 were identified for additional consultation and 3 for further research and development. A pre-Consensus Conference survey soliciting feedback from stakeholders on indicator recommendations received 48 responses (response rate of 79%).
Conclusions: A systematic evaluation of HSP indicators informed the development of objective recommendations for continued reporting. The evaluation was a fruitful exercise to identify technical considerations for calculating indicators, furthering our understanding of how measures are used by stakeholders, as well as harmonising actions that could be taken to ensure relevancy, reduce indicator chaos and build consensus with stakeholders.
Keywords: Consensus methods; Evaluation; Health indicators; Health system performance.
Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://www.bmj.com/company/products-services/rights-and-licensing/.
Conflict of interest statement
Similar articles
-
A multi-step approach to developing a health system evaluation framework for community-based health care.BMC Health Serv Res. 2022 Jul 9;22(1):889. doi: 10.1186/s12913-022-08241-6. BMC Health Serv Res. 2022. PMID: 35804388 Free PMC article.
-
Prioritizing performance measurement for emergency department care: consensus on evidence-based quality of care indicators.CJEM. 2011 Sep;13(5):300-9, E28-43. doi: 10.2310/8000.2011.110334. CJEM. 2011. PMID: 21955411
-
Developing outcome, process and balancing measures for an emergency department longitudinal patient monitoring system using a modified Delphi.BMC Emerg Med. 2019 Jan 14;19(1):7. doi: 10.1186/s12873-018-0220-3. BMC Emerg Med. 2019. PMID: 30642263 Free PMC article.
-
Development of System Performance Indicators for Adolescent and Young Adult Cancer Care and Control in Canada.Value Health. 2020 Jan;23(1):74-88. doi: 10.1016/j.jval.2019.08.004. Epub 2019 Oct 11. Value Health. 2020. PMID: 31952676
-
A Canadian evaluation framework for quality improvement in childhood arthritis: key performance indicators of the process of care.Arthritis Res Ther. 2020 Mar 19;22(1):53. doi: 10.1186/s13075-020-02151-w. Arthritis Res Ther. 2020. PMID: 32192528 Free PMC article. Review.
Cited by
-
Appropriateness, effectiveness and safety of care delivered in Canadian hospitals: a longitudinal assessment on the utility of publicly reported performance trend data between 2012-2013 and 2016-2017.BMJ Open. 2020 Jun 16;10(6):e035447. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2019-035447. BMJ Open. 2020. PMID: 32554742 Free PMC article.
-
Selecting Performance Indicators and Targets in Health Care: An International Scoping Review and Standardized Process Framework.Risk Manag Healthc Policy. 2022 Apr 21;15:747-764. doi: 10.2147/RMHP.S357561. eCollection 2022. Risk Manag Healthc Policy. 2022. PMID: 35478929 Free PMC article.
-
Development of a prenatal program for adults with personal histories of childhood abuse or neglect: a Delphi consensus consultation study.Health Promot Chronic Dis Prev Can. 2018 Nov;38(11):393-403. doi: 10.24095/hpcdp.38.11.01. Health Promot Chronic Dis Prev Can. 2018. PMID: 30430814 Free PMC article.
-
Utilisation of a cocreation methodology to develop claims-based indicators for feedback on implementation of comparative effectiveness research results into practice.BMJ Open Qual. 2025 Mar 6;14(1):e002542. doi: 10.1136/bmjoq-2023-002542. BMJ Open Qual. 2025. PMID: 40050038 Free PMC article.
-
Using a Health Economic Framework to Prioritize Quality Indicators: An Example With Smoking Cessation in Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease.MDM Policy Pract. 2019 May 27;4(1):2381468319852358. doi: 10.1177/2381468319852358. eCollection 2019 Jan-Jun. MDM Policy Pract. 2019. PMID: 31192311 Free PMC article.
References
-
- Klazinga N, Fischer C, ten Asbroek A. Health services research related to performance indicators and benchmarking in Europe. J Health Serv Res Policy 2011:16:38–47. http://hsr.sagepub.com/content/16/suppl_2/38.long (accessed 16 Oct 2016). 10.1258/jhsrp.2011.011042 - DOI - PubMed
-
- Kelley E, Arispe I, Homes J. Beyond the initial indicators: lessons from the OECD Health Care Quality Indicators Project and the US National Healthcare Quality Report. Int J Qual Health Care 2006;18(Suppl 1):45–51. http://intqhc.oxfordjournals.org/content/18/suppl_1/45.long (accessed 16 Oct 2016). 10.1093/intqhc/mzl027 - DOI - PubMed
-
- Carinci F, Van Gool K, Mainz J, et al. . Towards actionable international comparisons of health system performance: expert revision of the OECD framework and quality indicators. Int J Qual Health Care 2015;27:137–46. http://intqhc.oxfordjournals.org/content/27/2/137 (accessed 16 Oct 2016). - PubMed
-
- Canadian Institute for Health Information. Roadmap initiative … launching the process. Ottawa: 2000. https://www.cihi.ca/en/profile_roadmap_launch_pdf_en.pdf (accessed 16 Oct 2016).
-
- Canadian Institute for Health Information. A performance measurement framework for the Canadian health system. Ottawa: 2013. https://secure.cihi.ca/free_products/HSP-Framework-ENweb.pdf (accessed 16 Oct 2016).
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources