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
. 2021 Jun 1;22(6):553-560.
doi: 10.1097/PCC.0000000000002683.

Quality Assessment of the Literature on Quality Improvement in PICUs: A Systematic Review

Yu Inata  1   2 , Etsuko Nakagami-Yamaguchi  1 , Yuko Ogawa  2 , Takeshi Hatachi  2 , Muneyuki Takeuchi  2
Affiliations

Quality Assessment of the Literature on Quality Improvement in PICUs: A Systematic Review

Yu Inata et al. Pediatr Crit Care Med. .

Abstract

Objectives: To synthesize the literature describing quality improvement in PICUs and to appraise the quality of extant research.

Data sources: We searched the PubMed, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases between May and June 2020.

Study selection: Peer-reviewed articles in English that report quality improvement interventions in PICUs were included. Titles and abstracts were screened, and articles were reviewed to determine whether they met quality improvement criteria.

Data extraction: Data were abstracted using a structured template. The quality of the included articles was assessed using the Quality Improvement Minimum Quality Criteria Set and scored on a scale of 0-16.

Data synthesis: Of the 2,449 articles identified, 158 were included in the analysis. The most common targets of quality improvement interventions were healthcare-associated infections (n = 17, 10.8%), handoffs (n = 15, 9.5%), rounds (n = 13, 8.2%), sedation/pain/delirium (n = 13, 8.2%), medication safety (n = 11, 7.0%), and unplanned extubation (n = 9, 5.7%). Of the six domains of healthcare quality described by the Institute of Medicine, patient-centeredness and timeliness were infrequently addressed, and none of the studies addressed equity. The median quality score based on the Quality Improvement Minimum Quality Criteria Set was 11.0 (25-75th interquartile range, 9.0-13.0). Although the quantity and quality of articles have been increasing, only 17% of the studies were deemed "high quality," having a score between 14 and 16. Only eight articles (5%) cited Standards for QUality Improvement Reporting Excellence guidelines for reporting quality improvement works.

Conclusions: The number of publications, including high-quality publications, on quality improvement interventions in PICUs has been increasing. However, low-quality articles continue to be published, even in recent years. Therefore, there is room for improvement in the quality of reporting.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors have disclosed that they do not have any potential conflicts of interest.

References

    1. Institute of Medicine Committee on Quality of Health Care in America: Crossing the Quality Chasm: A New Health System for the 21st Century. Washington, DC: National Academies Press, 2001
    1. Jones E, Furnival J, Carter WIdentifying and resolving the frustrations of reviewing the improvement literature: The experiences of two improvement researchers.BMJ Open Qual. 20198e000701
    1. Batalden PB, Davidoff FWhat is “quality improvement” and how can it transform healthcare?Qual Saf Health Care. 20071623
    1. Mehta NMQuality Improvement in the PICU – a Primer for Intensivists. 2019. Available at: https://healthmanagement.org/c/icu/IssueArticle/quality-improvement-in-t... . Accessed November 10, 2020
    1. Wolfe HA, Mack EHMaking care better in the pediatric intensive care unit.Transl Pediatr. 20187267274

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources