Do Clinicians Understand Quality Metric Data? An Evaluation in a Twitter-Derived Sample
- PMID: 28125827
- PMCID: PMC5831191
- DOI: 10.1002/jhm.2680
Do Clinicians Understand Quality Metric Data? An Evaluation in a Twitter-Derived Sample
Abstract
Objective: Despite significant efforts and cost, quality metrics do not consistently influence practice. While research has focused on improving data through statistical risk-adjustment, whether clinicians understand these data is unknown. Therefore, we assessed clinician comprehension of central line-associated blood stream infection (CLABSI) quality metric data.
Design: Cross-sectional survey with an 11-item test of CLABSI data comprehension. Each question assessed 1 of 3 concepts concerning CLABSI understanding: basic numeracy, risk-adjustment numeracy, and risk-adjustment interpretation. Hypothetical data were used and presented in a validated format.
Participants: Clinicians were recruited from 6 nations via Twitter to take an online survey. Clinician eligibility was confirmed by assessing responses to a question regarding CLABSI.
Main measures: The primary outcome was percent correct of attempted questions pertaining to the presented CLABSI data.
Results: Ninety-seven clinicians answered at least 1 item, providing 939 responses; 72 answered all 11 items. The mean percentage of correct answers was 61% (95% confidence interval [CI], 57%-65%). Overall, doctor performance was better than performance by nurses and other respondents (68% [95% CI, 63%-73%] vs. 57% [95% CI, 52%-62%], P = 0.003). In basic numeracy, mean percent correct was 82% (95% CI, 77%-87%). For risk-adjustment numeracy, the mean percent correct was 70% (95% CI, 64%-76%). Risk-adjustment interpretation had the lowest average percent correct, 43% (95% CI, 37%-49%). All pairwise differences between concepts were statistically significant at P <0.05.
Conclusions: CLABSI quality metric comprehension appears low and varies substantially among clinicians. These findings may contribute to the limited impact of quality metric reporting programs, and further research is needed. Journal of Hospital Medicine 2017;12:18-22.
© 2017 Society of Hospital Medicine.
Conflict of interest statement
Disclosures: The authors report no conflicts of interest.
Figures
Similar articles
-
A comprehension scale for central-line associated bloodstream infection: Results of a preliminary survey and factor analysis.PLoS One. 2018 Sep 13;13(9):e0203431. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0203431. eCollection 2018. PLoS One. 2018. PMID: 30212486 Free PMC article. Clinical Trial.
-
Do Experts Understand Performance Measures? A Mixed-Methods Study of Infection Preventionists.Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 2018 Jan;39(1):71-76. doi: 10.1017/ice.2017.243. Epub 2017 Dec 5. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 2018. PMID: 29202884 Free PMC article.
-
Numeracy and the medical student's ability to interpret data.Eff Clin Pract. 2002 Jan-Feb;5(1):35-40. Eff Clin Pract. 2002. PMID: 11874195
-
Closing the Quality Gap: A Critical Analysis of Quality Improvement Strategies (Vol. 6: Prevention of Healthcare–Associated Infections).Rockville (MD): Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (US); 2007 Jan. Report No.: 04(07)-0051-6. Rockville (MD): Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (US); 2007 Jan. Report No.: 04(07)-0051-6. PMID: 20734530 Free Books & Documents. Review.
-
Behavioral and Pharmacotherapy Weight Loss Interventions to Prevent Obesity-Related Morbidity and Mortality in Adults: An Updated Systematic Review for the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force [Internet].Rockville (MD): Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (US); 2018 Sep. Report No.: 18-05239-EF-1. Rockville (MD): Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (US); 2018 Sep. Report No.: 18-05239-EF-1. PMID: 30354042 Free Books & Documents. Review.
Cited by
-
Interpretability, credibility, and usability of hospital-specific template matching versus regression-based hospital performance assessments; a multiple methods study.BMC Health Serv Res. 2022 Jun 3;22(1):739. doi: 10.1186/s12913-022-08124-w. BMC Health Serv Res. 2022. PMID: 35659234 Free PMC article.
-
Responses of physicians to an objective safety and quality knowledge test: a cross-sectional study.BMJ Open. 2021 Sep 15;11(9):e040779. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2020-040779. BMJ Open. 2021. PMID: 34526329 Free PMC article.
-
Designing Tailored Displays for Clinical Practice Feedback: Developing Requirements with User Stories.Stud Health Technol Inform. 2019 Aug 21;264:1308-1312. doi: 10.3233/SHTI190438. Stud Health Technol Inform. 2019. PMID: 31438137 Free PMC article.
-
A comprehension scale for central-line associated bloodstream infection: Results of a preliminary survey and factor analysis.PLoS One. 2018 Sep 13;13(9):e0203431. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0203431. eCollection 2018. PLoS One. 2018. PMID: 30212486 Free PMC article. Clinical Trial.
-
Do Experts Understand Performance Measures? A Mixed-Methods Study of Infection Preventionists.Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 2018 Jan;39(1):71-76. doi: 10.1017/ice.2017.243. Epub 2017 Dec 5. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 2018. PMID: 29202884 Free PMC article.
References
-
- Scott RD., II The direct medical costs of healthcare-associated infections in us hospitals and the benefits of prevention. [Accessed November 8, 2016];Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Available at: http://www.cdc.gov/HAI/pdfs/hai/Scott_CostPaper.pdf. Published March 2009.
-
- O’Grady NP, Alexander M, Burns LA, et al. Guidelines for the prevention of intravascular catheter-related infections. Am J Infect Control. 2011;39(4 suppl 1):S1–S34. - PubMed
-
- Mermel LA. Prevention of intravascular catheter-related infections. Ann Intern Med. 2000;132(5):391–402. - PubMed
-
- Siempos II, Kopterides P, Tsangaris I, Dimopoulou I, Armaganidis AE. Impact of catheter-related bloodstream infections on the mortality of critically ill patients: a meta-analysis. Crit Care Med. 2009;37(7):2283–2289. - PubMed
Publication types
MeSH terms
Grants and funding
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources
