Abstract
Purpose: To develop a set of actionable quality indicators for critical care suitable for use in low- or middle-income countries (LMICs). Methods: A list of 84 candidate indicators compiled from a previous literature review and stakeholder recommendations were categorised into three domains (foundation, process, and quality impact). An expert panel (EP) representing stakeholders from critical care and allied specialties in multiple low-, middle-, and high-income countries was convened. In rounds one and two of the Delphi exercise, the EP appraised (Likert scale 1–5) each indicator for validity, feasibility; in round three sensitivity to change, and reliability were additionally appraised. Potential barriers and facilitators to implementation of the quality indicators were also reported in this round. Median score and interquartile range (IQR) were used to determine consensus; indicators with consensus disagreement (median < 4, IQR ≤ 1) were removed, and indicators with consensus agreement (median ≥ 4, IQR ≤ 1) or no consensus were retained. In round four, indicators were prioritised based on their ability to impact cost of care to the provider and recipient, staff well-being, patient safety, and patient-centred outcomes. Results: Seventy-one experts from 30 countries (n = 45, 63%, representing critical care) selected 57 indicators to assess quality of care in intensive care unit (ICU) in LMICs: 16 foundation, 27 process, and 14 quality impact indicators after round three. Round 4 resulted in 14 prioritised indicators. Fifty-seven respondents reported barriers and facilitators, of which electronic registry-embedded data collection was the biggest perceived facilitator to implementation (n = 54/57, 95%) Concerns over burden of data collection (n = 53/57, 93%) and variations in definition (n = 45/57, 79%) were perceived as the greatest barrier to implementation. Conclusion: This consensus exercise provides a common set of indicators to support benchmarking and quality improvement programs for critical care populations in LMICs.
Original language | English |
---|---|
Pages (from-to) | 1551-1562 |
Number of pages | 12 |
Journal | Intensive Care Medicine |
Volume | 48 |
Issue number | 11 |
DOIs | |
Publication status | Published - Nov 2022 |
Keywords
- Critical care
- Delphi technique
- LMIC
- Quality indicators
- Resource constrained
Fingerprint
Dive into the research topics of 'Development of a quality indicator set to measure and improve quality of ICU care in low- and middle-income countries'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.Cite this
- APA
- Author
- BIBTEX
- Harvard
- Standard
- RIS
- Vancouver
}
In: Intensive Care Medicine, Vol. 48, No. 11, 11.2022, p. 1551-1562.
Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review
TY - JOUR
T1 - Development of a quality indicator set to measure and improve quality of ICU care in low- and middle-income countries
AU - Collaboration for Research Implementation, Training in Critical Care, Asia Africa ‘CCAA’
AU - Pari, Vrindha
AU - Sluijs, Eva Fleur
AU - del Pilar Arias López, Maria
AU - Thomson, David Alexander
AU - Tripathy, Swagata
AU - Vengadasalam, Sutharshan
AU - Vijayaraghavan, Bharath Kumar Tirupakuzhi
AU - Pisani, Luigi
AU - de Keizer, Nicolette
AU - Adhikari, Neill K.J.
AU - Pilcher, David
AU - Inglis, Rebecca
AU - Bulamba, Fred
AU - Dondorp, Arjen M.
AU - Kooloth, Rohit Aravindakshan
AU - Phua, Jason
AU - Sendagire, Cornelius
AU - Waweru-Siika, Wangari
AU - Mazlan, Mohd Zulfakar
AU - Haniffa, Rashan
AU - Salluh, Jorge I.F.
AU - Davies, Justine
AU - Beane, Abigail
AU - Abonyo, Teddy Thaddeus
AU - Al-Saud, Najwan Abu
AU - Aryal, Diptesh
AU - Baker, Tim
AU - Belachew, Fitsum Kifle
AU - Biccard, Bruce M.
AU - Bonney, Joseph
AU - Burghi, Gaston
AU - Dongelmans, Dave A.
AU - Dullewe, N. P.
AU - Faiz, Mohammad Abul
AU - Fernandez, Mg Ariel
AU - siaw-frimpong, Moses
AU - Gallesio, Antonio
AU - Ghalib, Maryam Shamal
AU - Hashmi, Madiha
AU - Kayambankadzanja, Raphael Kazidule
AU - Kwizera, Arthur
AU - Luitel, Subekshya
AU - Moonesinghe, Ramani
AU - Nor, Mohd Basri Mat
AU - Paneru, Hem Raj
AU - Priyadarshani, Dilanthi
AU - Shaikh, Mohiuddin
AU - Srisawat, Nattachai
AU - Wijekoon, W. M.Ashan
AU - Yen, Lam Minh
N1 - Funding Information: This research is on behalf of the community of practice Collaboration for Research, Implementation and Training in Critical Care, Asia-Africa (CCAA), a Wellcome-UKRI/MRC funded research network. Wellcome grant number: 215522/Z/19/Z, UKRI/ MRC grant number: MR/V030884/1. This research was funded in whole or in part by the Wellcome Trust grant (215522/Z/19/Z). For the purpose of Open Access the author has applied a CC BY public copyright licence to any Author Accepted Manuscript arising from this submission. Funding Information: The authors are thankful for the key role played by patients, families and health care teams in critical care. Writing group: Vrindha Pari (Chennai Critical Care Consultants, Pvt Ltd, Chennai, India), Eva Fleur Sluijs (Institute for Global Health & Development, VU University Amsterdam), Maria del Pilar Arias López (Argentine Society of Intensive Care (SATI); SATI-Q Program), David Alexander Thomson (University of Cape Town, Groote Schuur Hospital, Cape Town, South Africa), Swagata Tripathy (All India Institute of Medical Sciences, Bhubaneswar, India), Sutharshan Vengadasalam (Department of general surgery, Teaching hospital, Jaffna, Sri lanka), Bharath Kumar Tirupakuzhi Vijayaraghavan (Department of Critical Care Medicine, Apollo Hospitals, Chennai, India), Luigi Pisani (Mahidol- Oxford Tropical Medicine Research Unit, Bangkok, Thailand, Doctors with Africa CUAMM, Padova, Italy), Nicolette de Keizer (Dept Medical Informatics, Amsterdam Public Health Institute, Amsterdam UMC Amsterdam, The Netherlands.), Neill K. J. Adhikari (Department of Critical Care Medicine, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre and Interdepartmental Division of Critical Care Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada), David Pilcher (Department of Intensive Care, Alfred Health, Melbourne, VIC 3004, Australia; The Australian and New Zealand Intensive Care Society (ANZICS) Centre for Outcome and Resources Evaluation, Camberwell, Melbourne, VIC 3124, Australia), Rebecca Inglis (University of Oxford, Lao Oxford Mahosot Wellcome Trust Research Unit (LOMWRU), Vientiane, Lao PDR) , Fred Bulamba (Department of Anesthesia and critical care, Faculty of Health sciences. Busitema University, Mbale, Uganda), Arjen M Dondorp (Mahidol- Oxford Tropical Medicine Research Unit, Bangkok, Thailand; Nuffield Department of Clinical Medicine. University of Oxford, Oxford, UK), Rohit Aravindakshan Kooloth (Apollo specialities, Chennai, India), Jason Phua (Fast and Chronic Programmes, Alexandra Hospital, National University Health System, Singapore; Division of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine, National University Hospital, National University Health System, Singapore), Cornelius Sendagire (Makerere University College of Health Science, Department of Anaesthesia & Critical Care, 7072 Kampala, Uganda), Wangari Waweru-Siika (Department of Anaesthesia, Aga Khan University, Nairobi.), Mohd Zulfakar Mazlan (Department of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care, School of Medical Sciences, Universiti Sains Malaysia, 16150 Kubang Kerian, Kelantan, Malaysia), Rashan Haniffa (Centre for Inflammation Research, University of Edinburgh, UK and Mahidol Oxford Tropical Medicine Research Unit Bangkok, Thailand, Nat-Intensive Care Surveillance-MORU, Colombo, Sri Lanka), Jorge IF Salluh (D'Or Institute for Research and Education, Rio De Janeiro, Brazil; Programa de pós-graduação em clínica médica- Universidade Federal do rio de Janeiro), Justine Davies (Institute of Applied Health Research, University of Birmingham, UK; Centre for Global Surgery, Department of Global Health, Stellenbosch University, Cape Town, South Africa; Medical Research Council/Wits University Rural Public Health and Health Transitions Research Unit, Faculty of Health Sciences, School of Public Health, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa), Abi Beane (Centre for Inflammation Research, University of Edinburgh, UK and Mahidol Oxford Tropical Medicine Research Unit Bangkok, Thailand) Justine Davies and Abigail Beane are joint last authors. Collaborators and members of the CCAA: Teddy Thaddeus Abonyo (Department of Anaesthesia, Aga Khan University, Nairobi), Najwan Abu Al-Saad (Department of Critical Care, University College London Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust), Diptesh Aryal (Mahidol- Oxford Tropical Medicine Research Unit, Bangkok, Thailand; Nepal Intensive Care Research Foundation, Kathmandu, Nepal), Tim Baker (Muhimbili University of Health & Allied Sciences, Tanzania), Fitsum Kifle Belachew (University of Cape Town, Groote Schuur Hospital, Cape Town, South Africa; Debre Berhan University Asrat Woldyes Health sciences campus, Debre Berhan Ethiopia), Bruce M Biccard (University of Cape Town, Groote Schuur Hospital, Cape Town, South Africa), Joseph Bonney (Komfo Anokye Teaching Hospital, Emergency Medicine Directorate, P.O.Box 1934 Kumasi, Ghana; Global Health and Infectious Diseases Research Group- Kumasi Center for Collaborative Research in Tropical Medicine), Gaston Burghi (Centro de Tratamiento Intensivo del Hospital de Clínicas, UDELAR, Montevideo, Uruguay), Dave A Dongelmans (Department of Intensive care Medicine, Amsterdam University Medical Centers, Amsterdam, Netherlands), N. P. Dullewe (Post Basic College of Nursing, Colombo, Sri Lanka), Mohammad Abul Faiz (Dev Care Foundation, Dhaka, Bangladesh), Mg Ariel Fernandez (Argentine Society of Intensive Care (SATI); SATI-Q Program), Moses siaw-frimpong (Komfo Anokye Teaching Hospital, Directorate of Anaesthesia and Intensive care, P.O.Box 1934 Kumasi, Ghana), Antonio Gallesio (Argentine Society of Intensive Care (SATI); SATI-Q Program), Maryam Shamal Ghalib (Wazir Akbar Khan Hospital, General Surgery Department, Kabul, Afghanistan), Madiha Hashmi (Southeast Asian Research in Critical Care and Health, Ziauddin Hospital, Karachi, Sindh, Pakistan), Raphael Kazidule Kayambankadzanja (College of Medicine, Private Bag 360, Blantyre Malawi), Arthur Kwizera (Makerere University College of Health Science, Department of Anaesthesia & Critical Care, 7072 Kampala, Uganda), Subekshya Luitel (Department of Critical Care, University College London Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust.), Ramani Moonesinghe (University College London (UCL); Consultant in anaesthesia and critical care, UCL Hospitals, London), Mohd Basri Mat Nor (Department of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care, School of Medicine, International Islamic University Malaysia), Hem Raj Paneru (Department of Critical Care Medicine, Tribhuvan University Teaching Hospital, Kathmandu, Nepal), Dilanthi Priyadarshani (Nat-Intensive Care Surveillance-MORU, Colombo, Sri Lanka), Mohiuddin Shaikh (Southeast Asian Research in Critical Care and Health, Ziauddin Hospital, Karachi, Sindh, Pakistan), Nattachai Srisawat (Chulalongkorn university, Bangkok, Thailand),W. M. Ashan Wijekoon (Faculty of Medicine, University of Colombo, Sri Lanka), Lam Minh Yen (University of Oxford, Lao Oxford Mahosot Wellcome Trust Research Unit (LOMWRU), Vientiane, Lao PDR). Funding Information: VP’s work and PhD is funded by CCAA-Wellcome. AB, RH and AD are partly funded by Wellcome. All other authors and collaborators have no competing interests. Publisher Copyright: © 2022, The Author(s).
PY - 2022/11
Y1 - 2022/11
N2 - Purpose: To develop a set of actionable quality indicators for critical care suitable for use in low- or middle-income countries (LMICs). Methods: A list of 84 candidate indicators compiled from a previous literature review and stakeholder recommendations were categorised into three domains (foundation, process, and quality impact). An expert panel (EP) representing stakeholders from critical care and allied specialties in multiple low-, middle-, and high-income countries was convened. In rounds one and two of the Delphi exercise, the EP appraised (Likert scale 1–5) each indicator for validity, feasibility; in round three sensitivity to change, and reliability were additionally appraised. Potential barriers and facilitators to implementation of the quality indicators were also reported in this round. Median score and interquartile range (IQR) were used to determine consensus; indicators with consensus disagreement (median < 4, IQR ≤ 1) were removed, and indicators with consensus agreement (median ≥ 4, IQR ≤ 1) or no consensus were retained. In round four, indicators were prioritised based on their ability to impact cost of care to the provider and recipient, staff well-being, patient safety, and patient-centred outcomes. Results: Seventy-one experts from 30 countries (n = 45, 63%, representing critical care) selected 57 indicators to assess quality of care in intensive care unit (ICU) in LMICs: 16 foundation, 27 process, and 14 quality impact indicators after round three. Round 4 resulted in 14 prioritised indicators. Fifty-seven respondents reported barriers and facilitators, of which electronic registry-embedded data collection was the biggest perceived facilitator to implementation (n = 54/57, 95%) Concerns over burden of data collection (n = 53/57, 93%) and variations in definition (n = 45/57, 79%) were perceived as the greatest barrier to implementation. Conclusion: This consensus exercise provides a common set of indicators to support benchmarking and quality improvement programs for critical care populations in LMICs.
AB - Purpose: To develop a set of actionable quality indicators for critical care suitable for use in low- or middle-income countries (LMICs). Methods: A list of 84 candidate indicators compiled from a previous literature review and stakeholder recommendations were categorised into three domains (foundation, process, and quality impact). An expert panel (EP) representing stakeholders from critical care and allied specialties in multiple low-, middle-, and high-income countries was convened. In rounds one and two of the Delphi exercise, the EP appraised (Likert scale 1–5) each indicator for validity, feasibility; in round three sensitivity to change, and reliability were additionally appraised. Potential barriers and facilitators to implementation of the quality indicators were also reported in this round. Median score and interquartile range (IQR) were used to determine consensus; indicators with consensus disagreement (median < 4, IQR ≤ 1) were removed, and indicators with consensus agreement (median ≥ 4, IQR ≤ 1) or no consensus were retained. In round four, indicators were prioritised based on their ability to impact cost of care to the provider and recipient, staff well-being, patient safety, and patient-centred outcomes. Results: Seventy-one experts from 30 countries (n = 45, 63%, representing critical care) selected 57 indicators to assess quality of care in intensive care unit (ICU) in LMICs: 16 foundation, 27 process, and 14 quality impact indicators after round three. Round 4 resulted in 14 prioritised indicators. Fifty-seven respondents reported barriers and facilitators, of which electronic registry-embedded data collection was the biggest perceived facilitator to implementation (n = 54/57, 95%) Concerns over burden of data collection (n = 53/57, 93%) and variations in definition (n = 45/57, 79%) were perceived as the greatest barrier to implementation. Conclusion: This consensus exercise provides a common set of indicators to support benchmarking and quality improvement programs for critical care populations in LMICs.
KW - Critical care
KW - Delphi technique
KW - LMIC
KW - Quality indicators
KW - Resource constrained
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85138153991&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1007/s00134-022-06818-7
DO - 10.1007/s00134-022-06818-7
M3 - Article
C2 - 36112158
AN - SCOPUS:85138153991
SN - 0342-4642
VL - 48
SP - 1551
EP - 1562
JO - Intensive Care Medicine
JF - Intensive Care Medicine
IS - 11
ER -