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
Review
. 2017;7(4):432-439.
doi: 10.1007/s40140-017-0234-5. Epub 2017 Sep 23.

Improvement Science in Anaesthesia

Duncan T Wagstaff  1   2   3 , James Bedford  1   2   3 , S Ramani Moonesinghe  1   2   3
Affiliations
Review

Improvement Science in Anaesthesia

Duncan T Wagstaff et al. Curr Anesthesiol Rep. 2017.

Abstract

Purpose of review: This article offers an overview of the history and features of Improvement Science in general and some of its applications to Anaesthesia in particular.

Recent findings: Improvement Science is an evolving discipline aiming to generate learning from quality improvement interventions. An increasingly common approach to improving Anaesthesia services is to employ large-scale perioperative data measurement and feedback programmes. Improvement Science offers important insights on questions such as which indicators to collect data for; how to capture that data; how it can be presented in engaging visual formats; how it could/should be fed back to frontline staff and how they can be supported in their use of data to generate improvement.

Summary: Data measurement and feedback systems represent opportunities for anaesthetists to work with multidisciplinary colleagues to help improve services and outcomes for surgical patients. Improvement Science can help evaluate which approaches work, and in which contexts, and is therefore of value to healthcare commissioners, providers and patients.

Keywords: Anaesthesia; Data feedback; Improvement Science; Quality.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Conflict of Interest

Duncan T. Wagstaff, James Bedford, and S. Ramani Moonesinghe declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Human and Animal Rights and Informed Consent

This article does not contain any studies with human or animal subjects performed by any of the authors.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
An example of a VLAD chart showing observed vs. expected deaths incorporating risk-adjustment
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. • The Health Foundation. Evidence scan: Improvement science [Internet]. 2011. Available from: http://www.health.org.uk/sites/health/files/ImprovementScience.pdf. This research scan summarises readily available research about the concept and practice of improvement science. It is not a systematic review and does not seek to summarise theoretical literature or to explore the narrative development of improvement science..
    1. Shojania KG, Grimshaw JM. Evidence-based quality improvement: the state of the science. Health Aff. 2005;24:138–150. doi: 10.1377/hlthaff.24.1.138. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Bellin E, Fletcher DD, Geberer N, Islam S, Srivastava N. Democratizing information creation from health care data for quality improvement, research, and education—the Montefiore Medical Center Experience. Acad Med. 2010;85:1362–1368. doi: 10.1097/ACM.0b013e3181df0f3b. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Margolis P, Provost LP, Schoettker PJ, Britto MT. Quality improvement, clinical research, and quality improvement research—opportunities for integration. Pediatr Clin N Am. 2009;56:831–841. doi: 10.1016/j.pcl.2009.05.008. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Berwick DM. The science of improvement. JAMA J Am Med Assoc. 2008;299:1182–1184. doi: 10.1001/jama.299.10.1182. - DOI - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources