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
. 2023 Mar;4(1):e258.
doi: 10.1097/AS9.0000000000000258. Epub 2023 Mar 1.

Development of the Illinois Surgical Quality Improvement Collaborative (ISQIC): Implementing 21 Components to Catalyze Statewide Improvement in Surgical Care

Karl Y Bilimoria  1   2 , Michael F McGee  1 , Mark V Williams  3 , Julie K Johnson  1 , Amy L Halverson  1 , Kevin J O'Leary  4 , Paula Farrell  1 , Juliana Thomas  1 , Remi Love  1 , Lindsey Kreutzer  1 , Allison R Dahlke  1 , Brianna D'Orazio  1   2 , Steven Reinhart  5 , Katelyn Dienes  5 , Mark Schumacher  5 , Ying Shan  1   2 , Christopher Quinn  1 , Vivek N Prachand  6 , Susan Sullivan  6 , Kimberly A Cradock  7 , Kelsi Boyd  7 , William Hopkinson  8 , Colleen Fairman  8 , David Odell  1   2 , Jonah J Stulberg  1 , Cindy Barnard  9 , Jane Holl  1   2 , Ryan P Merkow  1   2 , Anthony D Yang  1   2
Affiliations

Development of the Illinois Surgical Quality Improvement Collaborative (ISQIC): Implementing 21 Components to Catalyze Statewide Improvement in Surgical Care

Karl Y Bilimoria et al. Ann Surg Open. 2023 Mar.

Abstract

Introduction: In 2014, 56 Illinois hospitals came together to form a unique learning collaborative, the Illinois Surgical Quality Improvement Collaborative (ISQIC). Our objectives are to provide an overview of the first three years of ISQIC focused on (1) how the collaborative was formed and funded, (2) the 21 strategies implemented to support quality improvement (QI), (3) collaborative sustainment, and (4) how the collaborative acts as a platform for innovative QI research.

Methods: ISQIC includes 21 components to facilitate QI that target the hospital, the surgical QI team, and the peri-operative microsystem. The components were developed from available evidence, a detailed needs assessment of the hospitals, reviewing experiences from prior surgical and non-surgical QI Collaboratives, and interviews with QI experts. The components comprise 5 domains: guided implementation (e.g., mentors, coaches, statewide QI projects), education (e.g., process improvement (PI) curriculum), hospital- and surgeon-level comparative performance reports (e.g., process, outcomes, costs), networking (e.g., forums to share QI experiences and best practices), and funding (e.g., for the overall program, pilot grants, and bonus payments for improvement).

Results: Through implementation of the 21 novel ISQIC components, hospitals were equipped to use their data to successfully implement QI initiatives and improve care. Formal (QI/PI) training, mentoring, and coaching were undertaken by the hospitals as they worked to implement solutions. Hospitals received funding for the program and were able to work together on statewide quality initiatives. Lessons learned at one hospital were shared with all participating hospitals through conferences, webinars, and toolkits to facilitate learning from each other with a common goal of making care better and safer for the surgical patient in Illinois. Over the first three years, surgical outcomes improved in Illinois.

Discussion: The first three years of ISQIC improved care for surgical patients across Illinois and allowed hospitals to see the value of participating in a surgical QI learning collaborative without having to make the initial financial investment themselves. Given the strong support and buy-in from the hospitals, ISQIC has continued beyond the initial three years and continues to support QI across Illinois hospitals.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

Figures

FIGURE 1.
FIGURE 1.
ISQIC hospital map.
FIGURE 2.
FIGURE 2.
ISQIC training modules.
FIGURE 3.
FIGURE 3.
Improvement in QI-KAT with ISQIC.
FIGURE 4.
FIGURE 4.
ISQIC benchmarked hospital quality reports. UTI indicates urinary tract infection. OR, Operating Room.
FIGURE 5.
FIGURE 5.
ISQIC QI and Safety Culture Comparative Report. A and B, ISQIC hospital safety culture report. OR, Operating Room.
FIGURE 6.
FIGURE 6.
ISQIC hospital ROI reports. A, Reduction in surgical complications and estimated financial savings. B, ISQIC statewide improvement. AHA, American Hospital Association; NA, Not Applicable.
FIGURE 7.
FIGURE 7.
Improvement in ISQIC outcomes. A, VTE. B, SSI.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Comment in

References

    1. Ghaferi AA, Birkmeyer JD, Dimick JB. Variation in hospital mortality associated with inpatient surgery. N Engl J Med. 2009;361:1368–1375. - PubMed
    1. Tsai TC, Joynt KE, Orav EJ, et al. Variation in surgical-readmission rates and quality of hospital care. N Engl J Med. 2013;369:1134–1142. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Wakeam E, Hyder JA, Lipsitz SR, et al. Hospital-level variation in secondary complications after surgery. Ann Surg. 2016;263:493–501. - PubMed
    1. Wong SL, Revels SL, Yin H, et al. Variation in hospital mortality rates with inpatient cancer surgery. Ann Surg. 2015;261:632–636. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Dimick JB, Chen SL, Taheri PA, et al. Hospital costs associated with surgical complications: a report from the private-sector National Surgical Quality Improvement Program. J Am Coll Surg. 2004;199:531–537. - PubMed