slide1
Download
Skip this Video
Download Presentation
John Varlow, Director of Information Analysis Health and Social Care Information Centre

Loading in 2 Seconds...

play fullscreen
1 / 25

John Varlow, Director of Information Analysis Health and Social Care Information Centre - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 84 Views
  • Uploaded on

Measuring Quality: Using Clinical Quality Indicators, Metrics and Dashboards to Measure Quality in Your Organisation. John Varlow, Director of Information Analysis Health and Social Care Information Centre . Environment and Context. System wide changes:

loader
I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
capcha
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about ' John Varlow, Director of Information Analysis Health and Social Care Information Centre ' - paniz


An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript
slide1

Measuring Quality: Using Clinical Quality Indicators, Metrics and Dashboards to Measure Quality in Your Organisation

John Varlow, Director of Information Analysis

Health and Social Care Information Centre

environment and context
Environment and Context
  • System wide changes:
    • Anew system for commissioning, delivering, and accounting for health, public health and social care outcomes
    • New structures and responsibilities between NHS England, Public Health England, the Health and Social Care Information Centre (HSCIC), the Department of Health (DH) and Government
    • Attempt at genuine devolution to local organisations
    • New regulatory functionsfor statutory bodies
the quality framework

NHS OUTCOMES FRAMEWORK

NHS OUTCOMES FRAMEWORK

Domain 1

Domain 1

Domain 2

Domain 2

Domain 3

Domain 3

Domain 4

Domain 4

Domain 5

Domain 5

Preventing

Preventing

Enhancing

Enhancing

Recovery

Recovery

Ensuring a

Ensuring a

Safe

Safe

people from

people from

the quality

the quality

from

from

positive

positive

environment

environment

dying

dying

of life for

of life for

episodes of

episodes of

patient

patient

free from

free from

prematurely

prematurely

people with

people with

ill health /

ill health /

experience

experience

avoidable

avoidable

LTCs

LTCs

injury

injury

harm

harm

NICE Quality Standards

NICE Quality Standards

Duty of quality

Duty of quality

(Building a library of approx 150 over 5 years)

(Building a library of approx 150 over 5 years)

Duty of quality

Duty of quality

Provider payment mechanisms

Provider payment mechanisms

Clinical Commissioning Group Outcomes Indicator Set

Commissioning

Commissioning

Commissioning

Outcomes

standard

standard

Guidance

Guidance

tariff

tariff

CQUIN

CQUIN

QOF

QOF

Framework

contract

contract

Commissioning / Contracting

Commissioning / Contracting

NHS Commissioning Board

NHS Commissioning Board

certain specialist services and primary care

certain specialist services and primary care

GP Consortia

GP Consortia

all other services

all other services

Duty of quality

Duty of quality

The Quality Framework
outcomes frameworks
Outcomes Frameworks
  • NHS Outcomes Framework (NHSOF)
  • Clinical Commissioning Group Outcome Indicator Set (CCGOIS)
  • Public Health Outcomes Framework (PHOF)
  • Adult Social Care Outcomes Framework (ASCOF)
indicators in context what can we say
Indicators in Context: What Can We Say?

The HSCIC’s website lists over 3,000 indicators, alongside other products, yet covers only a part of the full range of clinical care. There are many more indicators in use locally. This is illustrative of the challenges we face in monitoring clinical quality.

the move to monitoring outcomes
The Move to Monitoring Outcomes
  • Accountability shift from what is done, to what is achieved with available resources, demonstrating continuing improvement
  • In the absence of evidence based standards for some services, comparative data, for example stroke deaths, may show that outcomes are less than optimal
  • Evidence-based process indicators, for example those listed in NICE Quality Standards and the Outcomes Frameworks act as a proxy for outcomes
  • An intervention now may have an impact years / decades in the future; an outcome now may reflect interventions going back years / decades
  • Attribution and apportioning credit, hence accountability is likely to be difficult
what is a metric
What is a Metric?
  • A metric is a measure of a known attribute
    • eg a speedometer in a car dashboard
    • eg within clinical care, a blood pressure reading
  • Metrics, whether based on physical instruments or questionnaires, need rigorous testing and calibration plus precision in use
what is an indicator
What is an Indicator?
  • An indicator describes how a measure is expected to be used to judge quality
  • includes clear statements about the intended goal / objective;
  • whether it is expected to be used in isolation or in combination with other measures or indicators;
  • any thresholds or standards which are expected to be applied
    • e.g. a gauge to show whether speed is within legal limits in a car dashboard
    • e.g. within clinical care, the proportion of patients with controlled high blood pressure
  • An indicator may act as an alert to an issue that needs further investigation
indicator or metric
Indicator or Metric?
  • Metric – number of emergency readmissions to an acute hospital trust following an appendectomy
  • Indicator – rate of readmissions
  • Consider the context and may need to take into account
    • whether the readmissions are avoidable
    • co-morbidities
    • whether a certain number are acceptable
    • casemix of patients
indicator development
Indicator Development
  • Is the indicator rationale supported by evidence?
  • Does the indicator relate to clinical care or outcome that is influenced by actions of commissioners or providers?
  • Has this aspect been identified as a priority?
  • Can the indicator be developed so that it is measurable?
  • Is there evidence of inappropriate variation in clinical care or outcomes?
  • Could adoption of best practice significantly improve quality and outcomes?
  • Is there scope for improvement?
indicator development1
Indicator Development
  • Do you want/need to look at a single aspect of care or whole pathway?
  • How will improvement be measured?
  • Who is your intended audience?
  • If you are comparing with other trusts are you comparing like with like?
  • Do you need a simple or composite indicator?
  • Provider or commissioner based?
  • Longitudinal or cross sectional?
  • Selection of number of indicators is not easy….
deciding how many indicators to focus on

Clinical Quality

Potential activities

AVOIDING RISK

RISK

REDUCING RISK

DISEASE / ILL HEALTH

TIMELY INTERVENTION

ADVERSE EVENTS

LATE INTERVENTION

QUALITY OF LIFE

PREMATURE DEATH

Deciding how many indicators to focus on
  • Single aspect eg renal dialysis versus whole pathway eg obesity, uncontrolled high blood pressure, kidney disease, QOL, deaths
  • Tension – too few may leave gaps and distort priorities, too many may overwhelm the organisation
  • Potential solution - hierarchies, with ability to drill down to detail, as necessary
  • Potential solution – menu, with ability to select those to be displayed in the dashboard
indicators nice quality standards

Information

5: Education and self-management

Indicators: NICE Quality Standards
establishing limits and thresholds
Establishing Limits and Thresholds
  • In any absence of evidence-based standards, it is important to establish a basis for judging quality and improvement
  • The ‘National Average’ is not always the best marker as it combines good and poor quality
  • It may be possible to arrive at some notion of ‘optimum’ based on best levels achieved elsewhere, for example cancer survival or emergency admissions in some parts of the country / other countries
  • Dependent on clarity around purpose of indicator and audience e.g. clinician, patient, policy maker, manager, public etc.
indicator assurance process
Indicator Assurance Process
  • Hosted on behalf of the whole system
  • Indicator Assurance Service
  • Standard indicator assurance templates
  • Methodology Review Group
  • Independent Peer Review
  • Indicator Assurance Process
  • Indicator Governance Board
  • National Library of Assured Indicators
    • Repository
indicator assurance considerations
Indicator Assurance Considerations
  • Purpose of indicator
  • Rationale, evidence based standard
  • What is measured – numerator, denominator, construction, source of data, completeness of counts, quality of data
  • How data are aggregated - type of analysis (direct/indirect standardisation), risk adjustment e.g. for age, gender, method of admission, diagnosis, procedure, co-morbidity etc. to compare ‘like’ with ‘like’
  • Scientific validity – face, content, construct, criterion, predictive; validity for public, clinicians, performance
  • Interpretation – identifying outliers, explaining observations
  • Use – timeliness, gaming, costs, access, credibility, feasibility, usefulness
  • Investigation and action – play of chance, artefacts (e.g. data quality), quality of care
indicator development and assurance
Indicator Development and Assurance
  • Skills and expertise from HSCIC and the wider system
    • Methodologists
    • Epidemiologists
    • Statisticians
    • Subject Matter Experts
    • Informatics Specialists
    • Measurement Specialists
    • Clinicians and Patients
dashboards
Dashboards
  • “All that glitters is not gold”

Shakespeare – Merchant of Venice

  • “Simplify, simplify, simplify!”

Henry David Thoreau

  • “Maximise the data – ink ratio”

Edward R Tufte – The Visual Display of Quantitative Information

  • “Unless you know what you’re doing you’ll end up with a cluttered mess”

Stephen Few – Information Dashboard Design:

The Effective Visual Communication of Data

dashboards 13 common mistakes
Dashboards: 13 Common Mistakes
  • Exceeding a single screen
  • Supplying inadequate context
  • Displaying excessive detail or precision
  • Choosing deficient measures
  • Choosing inappropriate visualisation
  • Introducing meaningless variety
  • Using poor design
  • Encoding quantitative data inaccurately
  • Arranging the data poorly
  • Highlighting important data ineffectively
  • Cluttering with useless decoration
  • Misusing colour
  • Unattractive display
in conclusion
In Conclusion
  • There are a lot of indicators out there
  • Ultimate choice depends on whether they meet criteria for good indicators
  • National indicators for NHSOF and CCGOIS – assured and tested
  • Local indicator development based on local priorities
  • Consider triggers and alerts
  • Uses for Board reporting and assurance
  • Dashboards can be used to support delivery of safe and effective care – but only if they are well designed
  • Integrating local data flows – instantaneous reporting
ad