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
. 2022 Aug 23;6(4):e10335.
doi: 10.1002/lrh2.10335. eCollection 2022 Oct.

Evaluating clinician-led quality improvement initiatives: A system-wide embedded research partnership at Stanford Medicine

Stacie Vilendrer  1 , Erika A Saliba-Gustafsson  1 , Steven M Asch  1 , Cati G Brown-Johnson  1 , Samantha M R Kling  1 , Jonathan G Shaw  1 , Marcy Winget  1 , David B Larson  2
Affiliations

Evaluating clinician-led quality improvement initiatives: A system-wide embedded research partnership at Stanford Medicine

Stacie Vilendrer et al. Learn Health Syst. .

Abstract

Introduction: Many healthcare delivery systems have developed clinician-led quality improvement (QI) initiatives but fewer have also developed in-house evaluation units. Engagement between the two entities creates unique opportunities. Stanford Medicine funded a collaboration between their Improvement Capability Development Program (ICDP), which coordinates and incentivizes clinician-led QI efforts, and the Evaluation Sciences Unit (ESU), a multidisciplinary group of embedded researchers with expertise in implementation and evaluation sciences.

Aim: To describe the ICDP-ESU partnership and report key learnings from the first 2 y of operation September 2019 to August 2021.

Methods: Department-level physician and operational QI leaders were offered an ESU consultation to workshop design, methods, and overall scope of their annual QI projects. A steering committee of high-level stakeholders from operational, clinical, and research perspectives subsequently selected three projects for in-depth partnered evaluation with the ESU based on evaluability, importance to the health system, and broader relevance. Selected project teams met regularly with the ESU to develop mixed methods evaluations informed by relevant implementation science frameworks, while aligning the evaluation approach with the clinical teams' QI goals.

Results: Sixty and 62 ICDP projects were initiated during the 2 cycles, respectively, across 18 departments, of which ESU consulted with 15 (83%). Within each annual cycle, evaluators made actionable, summative findings rapidly available to partners to inform ongoing improvement. Other reported benefits of the partnership included rapid adaptation to COVID-19 needs, expanded clinician evaluation skills, external knowledge dissemination through scholarship, and health system-wide knowledge exchange. Ongoing considerations for improving the collaboration included the need for multi-year support to enable nimble response to dynamic health system needs and timely data access.

Conclusion: Presence of embedded evaluation partners in the enterprise-wide QI program supported identification of analogous endeavors (eg, telemedicine adoption) and cross-cutting lessons across QI efforts, clinician capacity building, and knowledge dissemination through scholarship.

Keywords: embedded research; learning health systems; partnership; quality improvement.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors have no conflicts of interest to report.

Figures

FIGURE 1
FIGURE 1
Roles of the Evaluation Sciences Unit within the learning health system
FIGURE 2
FIGURE 2
Roles and responsibilities of quality improvement teams (left side) and the Evaluation Sciences Unit (right side) in Improvement Capability Development Program (ICDP) projects. Red represents roles and responsibilities typically associated with quality improvement whereas blue represents roles and responsibilities of embedded researchers. The exact balance of these roles and responsibilities was tailored for each ICDP project
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Institute of Medicine (U.S.) , Grossmann C, Powers B, JM MG. Digital infrastructure for the learning health system: the Foundation for Continuous Improvement in health and health care: workshop series summary. Washington, DC: National Academies Press; 2011. - PubMed
    1. Best care at lower cost: the path to continuously learning health care in America. Washington, DC: National Academies Press; 2013:13444. doi: 10.17226/13444 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Foley TJ, Vale L. What role for learning health systems in quality improvement within healthcare providers? Learn Health Sys. 2017;1(4):e10025. doi: 10.1002/lrh2.10025 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Enticott J, Johnson A, Teede H. Learning health systems using data to drive healthcare improvement and impact: a systematic review. BMC Health Serv Res. 2021;21(1):200. doi: 10.1186/s12913-021-06215-8 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Delaney BC, Curcin V, Andreasson A, et al. Translational medicine and patient safety in Europe: TRANSFoRm—architecture for the learning health system in Europe. Biomed Res Int. 2015;2015:1‐8. doi: 10.1155/2015/961526 - DOI - PMC - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources