Developing and Sustaining Perinatal Quality Collaboratives

Transcript

1 Deve loping and Sustaining Perinatal Quality Collaboratives A Resource Guide for States Version March 4, 2016

2 The Perinatal Quality Collaborative Guide Working Group This report is the product of a dedicated group of Perinatal Quality Collaborative (PQC) experts from across the nation, chosen for their extensive experience with quality The process of improvement organizations and initiatives and their varied perspectives. developing this resource included a November 2014 in -person gathering of Working Group members in Atlanta, several small group conference calls over a period of four months, and the collective review and editing of drafts. The goal of this working group was to provide life experiences in the development of their respective state lessons learned and share real- The Centers for Disease Con PQCs or their work to support perinatal quality improvement. trol ’s Division of Reproductive Health is grateful for their enthusiastic and Prevention participation and responsiveness. Working Group Members An n E.B. Borders, MD, MPH, MSc Illinois Perinatal Quality Collaborative Peter Cherouny, MD Institute for Healthcare Improvement Hafsatou Diop, MD, MPH Massachusetts Perinatal Quality Collaborative Kelly Ernst, MPH March of Dimes Jeffrey B. Gould, MD, MPH California Perinatal Quality Care Collaborative Peter Grubb, MD Tennessee Initiative for Perinatal Quality Care Munish Gupta, MD, MMSc Neonatal Quality Improvement Collaborative of Massachusetts Jay Iams, MD Ohio Perinatal Quality Collaborative 1

3 Marilyn Kacica, MD, MPH New York State Perinatal Quality Collaborative Elliott Main, MD California Maternal Quality Care Collaborative Carole Lannon, MD, MPH Ohio Perinatal Quality Collaborative Martin McCaffrey, MD, CAPT USN (Ret) Perinatal Quality Collaborative of North Carolina Barbara Murphy, RN, MSN California Maternal Quality Care Collaborative Californ ia Perinatal Quality Care Collaborative William M. Sappenfield, MD, MPH Florida Perinatal Quality Collaborative CDC Staff Zsakeba Henderson, MD, FACOG Danielle B. Suchdev, MPH Westat Staff Melanie Chansky, MAA Brittney Francis, MPH Saloni Sapru, PhD 2

4 Acknowledgments Consistent with the subject matter of this document, this was a collaborative effort made possible by the contributions of many individuals. s. William Callaghan and This includes Dr Karon Abe of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, who encouraged and supported this project from its conceptualization. We would also like to acknowledge Deborah Carpenter and Dr. Russ Mardon of Westat for using their quality improvement expertise to facilitate the Working Group ’s small- group discu ssions. We are also indebted to the state- based collaboratives that allowed us to visit and learn from them in -person, including the Illinois Perinatal Quality Collaborative, the Mississippi Perinatal Quality Collaborative, the New Jersey Perinatal Safety Collaborative, the Northern New England Perinatal Quality Improvement Network, the Tennessee Initiative for Perinatal Quality Care, and the Texas Collaborative for Healthy Mothers and Babies. Many other individuals offered valuable advice, feedback, and information for this document, including Martha Boisseau, Emily Osteen Johnston, and Lori de Ravello (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention/Division of Reproductive Health); Heather Hagenson and Steve Holt (Colorado Perinatal Care Quality Collaborative); Patricia Lee King (Illinois Perinatal Quality Collaborative); Sue Gallo (Institute for Healthcare Improvement); Rebekah Gee (Louisiana Birth Outcomes Initiative); Kristen Lawless and Wendy Pulver (New York State Perinatal Quality Collaborative); Tara Bristol -Rouse (Perinatal Quality Collaborative of North Carolina); and Brenda Barker (Tennessee Initiative for Perinatal Quality Care). Lastly, thank you to all of the Hospital teams, health department staff, and others who have contributed to this important work and allowed us to learn from you. 3

5 Table of Contents Chapter Page roduction and Purpose ... Int 6 ing a Statewide Collaborative 8 Start ... 1 1.1 Identify ing and Engaging Key Players ... 8 -In ... 10 1.2 Ensuring Buy Establishing Your Identity 12 1.3 ... ... 15 1.4 Securing Funding Start -Up Case Studies ... 15 1.5 1.6 ... 17 Resources Launching Initiatives 18 2 ... 2.1 Topic Selection ... 18 Project Leadership, Staffing, and Ke y Partners ... 21 2.2 2.3 and Design Considerations ... 22 Key Drivers Recruiti ng and Engaging Participants ... 24 2.4 2.5 Collaborative Learning ... 25 2.6 Evaluation 26 ... Initiativ e Wrap ... 26 -Up and Sustainability 2.7 ... 28 Resources 2.8 Data and Measurement ... 3 29 3.1 Good ” Measure of Change ... 29 Finding a “ 3.2 Types and Sources of Measures and Data ... 30 3.3 Other Data Considerations ... 33 3.4 Data Analysis 36 ... Data Sharing ... 3.5 37 3.6 Resources ... 38 4 Quality Improvement Methods ... 39 4.1 ... 39 Quality Improvement Models 4.2 Considerations When Planning/Conducting a Qu ality Improvement Initiative ... 42 4.3 Resources ... 47 4

6 Contents (continued) Dissemination 48 5 ... Compon ents of a Dissemination Plan 5.1 48 ... 5.2 Resources ... 51 6 Sustainability ... 52 6.1 ... 52 Sustainability Planning 6.2 S upports for Susta inability ... 54 6.3 Sustainability Case Studies ... 55 6.4 Resources ... 57 5

7 Introduction and Purpose , or PQCs, are networks of perinatal care providers and public Perinatal quality collaboratives health professionals working to improve health outcomes for women and newborns through continuous quality improvement. Across the United States, organizations and individuals with an interest in improving perinatal health outcomes come together to develop these collaboratives to address their concerns. Many of these collaboratives are organized at the state level to allow for effective partnerships with public health agencies and other state- bas ed resources and systems. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) recognizes the value that PQCs can bring to improving perinatal health and provides a variety of online resources to support In 2011, CDC provide d funding to support state- based collaboratives in California , New them. , and Ohio York , and and in 2014 that support grew to include North Carolina , Illinois as well. Still, states without Massachusetts PQCs, or those with newly emerging collaboratives, may need more help getting started or furthering their efforts, which is why this Guidance Document was created. is document is intended to provide a ssistance to states that may wish to form PQCs or that Th are facing challenges with any aspect of PQC For a general introduction, you can webinar view CDC’s Collaboratives 101 development. Although most users of this guide featuring PQC leaders from New York will probably be in the early stages of and Ohio discussing their purpose, collaborative development, this document may basic structure, and past successes. also be helpful to existing PQCs who want to enhance their efforts. Each state has unique issues to address, but there are common challenges and best practices that can be applied to collaborative development across regions. This guide provides information on: Starting a Statewi de Collaborative. Chapter 1 focuses on the activities that  need to occur during the planning process to start a collaborative.  Launching Initiatives. Chapter 2 provides information about selecting and beginning to implement quality improvement projects.  Data and Measurement. Chapter 3 discusses the data that you will use to show the impact of your collaborative’ s work, including how to select suitable measures and how to find data to support them.  Quality Improvement Methods. Chapter 4 offers information about several models and tools often used to support quality improvement projects. 6

8  Chapter 5 focuses on planning to make sure that different groups Dissemination. receive information about your collaborative and what it does.  Sustainability. Chapter 6 aims to provide guidance on how to grow and sustain your collaborative’ s work. This guide is an online resource that includes hyperlinks to other useful resources for perinatal quality improvement work . M ore information on PQCs can also be found from CDC’ s Division of Reproductive Health . 7

9 1. Starting a Statewide Collaborative A good deal of preparation needs to occur before a collaborative can be launched. Conducting a thorough planning process will ensure that you have the people and resources to give you the best chance of launching a successful and sustainable collaborative. This chapter aims to provide guidance on the activities that need to occur during the planning process for starting your PQC, including identifying the right people to be involved and . ensuring their buy- in, establishing your identity, and securing funding 1.1 Identifying and Engaging Key Players The success of your PQC will rely heavily on ensuring that you have the right people involved. groups listed below, these all Although a collaborative can begin without the involvement of groups will be engaged as your collaborative grows and develops. Key players include: Champions.  Leaders and Engaged and committed leadership is crucial for ’s mission. developing, implementing, and disseminating the collaborative ers and champions for the PQC must be engaged Individuals who can serve as lead early in the process of developing the collaborative. Their efforts will include educating other providers on the importance of a collaborative at Your PQC leadership should: the state level; engaging patients, Be • passionate about the issues and families, and stakeholders; developing and leading initiatives. • Be well -known and respected - Identifying leaders who are well • Understand the role of stakeholders respected by their colleagues is important, as these individuals will Understand the need to lead to • serve not only as content experts improve care (in obstetrics, neonatology, and that ocal change is l Know that • patient/family partnership, or support capacity the PQC needs to quality improvemen t), but will also building to make local changes prove critical for raising the credibility of the collaborative among state leaders, healthcare providers, and other key stakeholders.  Participants. Participants are the people and/or organizations, such as hospitals, that implement your initiatives. Engaging participants is critical for the success of your PQC, because without their willingness to participate in quality improvement initiatives, the collaborative will not be successful. Participant engagement is discussed in more detail in Chapter 2 of this document. 8

10  Operations A collaborative also relies upon core staff to ensure that its day- Staff. -day operations run smoothly. The collaborative’ s core team may start out small to additional staff may – such as an executive director and a project manager – but be added as the collaborative grows and adds more activities and complexity. (Funding for these positions is discussed later in this chapter.) Operations staff may include: This person is often a clinical champion who oversees ̶ Executive Director. and guides the collaborative. ̶ Project Manager. This person works closely with the executive director to s activities and maintain its day -to implement the collaborative’ -day functions. This person ensures that patients ̶ Patient/Family Partnerships Director. and families are meaningful partners in the planning, execution, and evaluation of the work. He or she may also work directly with participants, providing resources and support to assist with their patient/family engagement efforts. ̶ Project Ad ministrator. This person may support the project manager in administrative tasks such as handling vendor payments, sending newsletters, arranging meetings, answering emails and phone calls, updating website content, etc. ̶ Data Manager. This person manages t he data system that your collaborative uses to gather data from its initiatives. He or she may also be responsible for conducting statistical analyses and generating reports. IT/Programmers. will provide further support for your Th ese individuals ̶ ng is ’s website and/or data system, particularly when codi collaborative required. these staff positions depends on the size of your collaborative, what types of How you staff activities you undertake, and what resources you have available. Your specific needs will also determine whether these positions should be Building & Sustaining a In CDC’s -time and whether you need full -time or part Collaborative webinar , Barbara Murphy of the California Perinatal Quality Care them immediately upon launch or can add Collaborative and Marilyn Kacica of the them as the collaborative grows. New York State Perinatal Quality blishing an Collaborative describe esta Stakeholders, Stakeholders.  expert workgroup, communication broadly, are individuals or strategies, and past experiences and organizations that have an interest challenges with funding PQC efforts. in the work of the PQC. This interest can take many forms, including having a similar mission, or receiving benefits from the improved quality of care 9

11 that the collaborative is aiming to achieve. Some stakeholder groups may have access to resources that can contribute to the development and sustainability of your collaborative. These groups will engage more closely with your PQC if their perspective is reflected in your collaborative’ s mission and initiatives. Stakeholders that are often engaged by PQCs include: ; ̶ Patients and families State departments of health ̶ ; Universities/academic medical centers ; ̶ Non -profit and/or advocacy organizations (such as March of Dimes and the ̶ ; Association of Maternal and Child Health Programs) based hospital associations ; ̶ State- ̶ State representatives of national organizations (such as the American Academy of Pediatrics, the American College of Obstetricians and ’s Health, Obstetrical and Neonatal Gynecologists, the Association of Women Nurses, and the American Hospital Association); and ̶ Payers (including private insurers and sta te Medicaid agencies).  Patients and F amilies. Patient and family engagement can play a large role in the success of quality initiatives and is increasingly recognized as key to improving quality and safety in healthcare. atients and PQC participants may partner with p family members who have experienced care in their institutions to serve a number of functions as part of their quality improvement team. Roles for patients and family members may include: Educating clinical/content experts regarding the patient/family perspective; ̶ ̶ Identifying pieces of the process that are confusing or missing; ̶ Participating in information/data gathering; ̶ Discussing and analyzing findings; ̶ Assisting in developing action plans and making recommendations ; ̶ Contributing to the design and content of educational materials; and ̶ Assisting with pilot testing new materials and processes. 1.2 Ensuring Buy -In After identifying the groups who need to be involved in your collaborative, you will need to gain their su pport. But they will be more likely to support the new effort if they care about the 10

12 benefits they will gain from being part of the collaborative. Each group may value something different, so you will need to tailor your outreach accordingly to show what your collaborative offers. Examples of what different constituencies may value include: Hospitals. Hospitals are concerned with improving individual outcomes,  -effectiveness and reducing variability in care. improving quality of care, and cost All of these can be impacted by making quality improvements, such as those that your PQC wants to implement. Your PQC can bring not only the opportunity to participate in quality improvement (QI) initiatives, but also an infrastructure through which the hospital can increase its capacity to do QI work. In addition, the rapid turn -around data collected through PQC initiatives can quickly show that -to the initiatives are making a difference, and can provide up -date information to help drive decision inistrators. -making by hospital adm Payers and P  Organizations that provide health insurance (including urchasers. private insurers and state Medicaid agencies), as well as employers and other organizations that purchase health insurance, value improved health outcomes that lead to cost savings. Quality improvement initiatives can accomplish both of these goals. For example, a QI initiative focused on preventing central line- associated bloodstream infections in the neonatal intensive care unit could result in shorter length of hos pital stay for neonates. An initiative focused on reducing cost savings by reducing C- early elective deliveries may lead to the number of sections. For payers and purchasers, showing the link between the QI initiative contact other collaboratives and healthcare cost is important. You may choose to that have implemented the same or similar initiatives to see if they have cost savings data that they can share, or recommendations for consultants (such as healthcare economists) who can help with conducting these analyses.  Malpractice Insurers. Some PQC s involve medical malpractice insurers in the collaborative. These groups can be quite interested in perinatal quality improvement because obstetrics is often their largest source of malpractice lawsuits (and thus, cost). For malpractice insurers, the value of a PQC is that better care quality can lead to better patient outcomes, which will likely lead to fewer malpractice lawsuits. These are only three examples of ways you can tailor your message to meet the needs of different organizations. The important point is that you can more easily gain the buy- in of each group by making it clear how the PQC will specifically benefit them. 11

13 1.3 Establishing Your Identity Along with the other activities you will undertake while starting your collaborative, you need to develop your PQC ’s identity. Stakeholders, including patients and families, need to know who you are, what you do, and even more fundamentally, that you exist. Your identity encompasses not only your mission and goals, but also your physical presence (li kely in the form of a website). M ission, and G oals. PQCs have a clinical focus on health outcomes relating to the Focus, mother, the baby, or both. For example, the California Maternal Quality Care Collaborative focuses solely on maternal outcomes, the Neonatal Quality Improvement Collaborative of Massachusetts focuses on neonatal outcomes, and the Ohio Perinatal Quality Collaborative focuses on both. These focus areas determine the types of initiatives that your collaborative will implement. Selection of a clinical focus often occurs naturally, based upon the most pressing perinatal health issues in your state or region. Still, the availability of clinical leaders ’s decision and financial resources can also impact your collaborative s about where to focus. The collaborative’ s focus should be reflected in its mission statement and will prove important for engaging stakeholders, patients, and families. Having a clear sense of your collaborative ’s focus will help with articulating your mission and goals. Deve loping a mission statement is an important early step for your collaborative. The what how it statement needs to succinctly describe your collaborative is trying to accomplish, who will accomplish its goals, and it hopes to impact. This mission is fundame ntal to your m collaborative. It should guide your future initiatives and communicate who you are to patients, families, stakeholders, and participants. Your collaborative may also wish to create a series of goals that communicate your intentions with more specificity. Goals should support your mission statement and be clearly linked to it. Ideally, the collaborative should have only a small number of goals (3 to 5) in order to maintain its focus and to use resources wisely. When communicating with your target audiences and/or the general public, you do not necessarily have to present a clearly labeled mission statement with a list of goals, although you can take that approach. You simply need to make sure that you clearly communicate who you are and what you do. Figure 1 b elow provides examples taken from the websites of several PQCs to show the range of ways that your identity could be presented . 12

14 Br anding and D nline Presence. Your collaborative needs to establish its eveloping an O identity in other, more basic ways, starting with deciding upon its name. Once you have a name to signal your existence, you can undertake other branding activities, such as creating a logo and establishing a website. Setting up even a basic website increases credibility and is important for sustainability. It can initially be used to communicate the collaborative’ s mission and contact information, but as your PQC grows, it can facilitate dissemination efforts, can host information about your initiatives and your stakeholders, and can even facilitate data collection and communication with initiative participants. You may wish to visit the websites of other PQCs to see examples of what they have done. Chapter 5 provides more information about ways that your PQC can establish its online presence. 13

15 Figure 1. Mission and goal statements of three Perinatal Quality Collaboratives Florida Perinatal Quality Collaborative (FPQC) ’s mothers Mission: Advance perinatal health care quality and patient safety for all of Florida and infants through the collaboration of all FPQC stakeholders in the development of joint -driven best practices, and the quality improvement initiatives, the advancement of data promotion of education and training. Goals:  Engage perinatal health care stakeholders in the design, implementation, and evaluation of data- - and evidence -based, value- driven processes for population ad -effective perinatal health care quality improvement efforts that ded, cost enhance patient safety outcomes.  Encourage perinatal health care providers to educate and empower families and patients to become involved for their own well -being , as well as for the welfare of their communities.  Build and sustain consensus, awareness, and support across the state and nation regarding the value and benefits of active engagement with the FPQC in proposing, exploring, selecting, and launching new quality improvement initiatives. Become a nationally recognized leader and role model in perinatal health care  advancements through our effective evidence- based protocols for a variety of quality improvement processes.  Acquire the financial resources necessary for the ongoing development and sustainment of the FPQC. Massachusetts Perinatal Quality Collaborative (MPQC) The MPQC is a cooperative voluntary program involving Massachusetts maternity facilities and key perinatal stakeholders, designed to promote the sharing of best practices of care. Success will be based on outcome measures generated from individual healthcare facilities and state agencies. New York State Perinatal Quality Collaborative (NYSPQC) The New York State Perinatal Quality Collaborative (NYSPQC) is an initiative led by the New York State Department of Health (NYSDOH) Division of Family Health (DFH). The NYSPQC aims to provide the best and safest care for women and infants in New York State (NYS) by collaborating with birthing hospitals, perinatal ca re providers, and other key stakeholders to prevent and minimize harm through the translation of evidence- based practice guidelines to clinical practice. 14

16 1.4 Securing Funding Each collaborative will require a different amount of funding to get started, and the amount that is “ right ” for you will depend on what you are hoping to accomplish and how many activities/initiatives you plan to support. Under the right circumstances, where there are together, some PQCs have committed leaders who are willing to volunteer their time to work launched with virtually no funding (although that is rare). Most likely, you will need to find at least a small amount of funding to support your collaborative’ s launch. agencies (or types of agencies) that Available funding sources vary from state to state, but the have supported PQCs include: Academic institutions, such as local universities  ;  Federal agencies, such as CDC and the Health Resources and Services ; Administration Local chapters of national organizations such as the American Academy of  ’s Health, Pediatrics; American College of Nurse Midwives; Association of Women ; Obstetrics, and Neonatal Nurses; and March of Dimes  Private foundations ;  Private health insurers ;  id agencies ; and State agencies, including departments of health and Medica State hospital associations  . 1.5 Start-U p Case Studies Below we provide examples of four collaboratives that launched with different funding levels – minimal, limited, moderate, and substantial – to show how they started and how they used their initial funding. Minimal Funding (under $10,000) – Neonatal Quality Improvement  Collaborative of Massachusetts (NeoQIC)/Massachusetts Perinatal Quality Collaborative (MPQC). The perinatal quality collaborative in Massachusetts began in neonatology, with conversations between leading neonatologists representing the ten level III NICUs in the state, representatives from the Massachusetts Department of Public Health, and outside consultants from other collaboratives and networks occurring in 2001. The collaborative, however, did not begin in earnest until 2006 -2007. Its initial approach focused on clinical outcomes and quality improvement rather than the PQC ’s organizational 15

17 structure. The first meeting of NeoQIC was held in conjunction with an existing annual neonatology conference sponsored by one of the state’ s NICUs. General agreement was reached on a number of topics, including basic data sharing using Vermont Oxford Network (VON) data, a commitment to QI education, general principles of membership, and a decision to focus on nosocomial infections and retinopathy of prematurity as initial collaborative projects. Importantly, a membership principle agreed to at this first meeting was transparency between members with regards to quality process and outcome measures. Over the next a fairly several years, NeoQIC continued and gradually expanded its work, using Two yearly meetings served as the low -cost and administratively simple structure. ’s work; both meetings were organized as additions to foundation for NeoQIC existing regional neonatology conferences, with the host of each conference absorbing the modest additional costs. Baseline comparative data was obtained state report from VON, with the cost of this report initially through an annual funded through seed money from one of the NeoQIC hospitals and then annually through a grant f ’s Hospital. Participation in and leadership of rom Boston Children voluntary and was based on interest and NeoQIC meetings and projects was enthusiasm of individuals; no salary support was provided and administrative functions were performed by NeoQIC members. A relatively straightforward ” document was developed and agreed to b y all “Principles of Membership : 1) use of data only for quality members, with the primary principles being improvement and not for commercial purposes , and 2) transparency of data within the organization but privacy of data to external groups.  Limited Fun ding ($10,000- $100,000) – Florida Perinatal Quality Collaborative (FPQC). With support of state- wide partners, the FPQC was - launched with a small seed grant from the March of Dimes and support from in kind university faculty. At the same time as supporting the state development, implementation, and coordination of a new multi -state March of Dimes initiative, the FPQC leaders: 1) pulled together state partners to meet and plan the collaborative, 2) began collaborative meetings and activities, 3) visited participating hospitals when possible, and 4) explored other new initiatives and searched for funding. The FPQC then used the results from their initial initiatives to identify new initiatives and solicit additional grant funding that was used for staffing, hosting conferences, and dev eloping new initiatives. These statewide partners became the FPQC steering committee, which meets periodically to provide guidance and feedback.  Moderate Funding ($100,000- $499,999) – Illinois Perinatal Quality Collaborative (ILPQC). a small Children ’s Health The ILPQC started with Insurance Program Reauthorization Act quality grant from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, through the state Medicaid program. They used this initial funding to hire a part -time project coordinator to begin to organ ize the collaborative and its leaders and for travel to visit well -established PQCs. Most of the initial provider involvement was done in -kind. After organizing and gaining 16

18 information, the ILPQC applied for a grant to host a conference, which was used to engage state leaders and providers. Substantial California Perinatal Quality Care  Funding ($500,000+) – The CPQCC was initially funded with a planning grant Collaborative (CPQCC). from the David and Lucile Packard Foundation. This initial funding was used to support PQC leaders as they traveled around the state and held meetings to build relationships with various stakeholders, including state agencies and both private and academic medical centers. They also developed basic infrastructure for their collabor ative, including a meeting structure and an executive committee. CPQCC initially relied on the Vermont Oxford Network for data management. When their initial funding ran out, CPQCC was briefly supported by Stanford University (their fiscal intermediary) to allow them to remain functional until they were able to fund themselves sustainably through membership dues. 1.6 Resources The following resources and articles may be helpful to consult to provide further information on starting a collaborative: Building Local Capacity for Improvement: A Resource Guide for Chapters . 2006.  American Academy of Pediatrics. http://www2.aap.org/member/chapters/caqi/Chapter_RG.pdf  Establishing a Child Health Improvement Partnership: A How -To Guide . 2015. Vermont Child Health Improvement Program. https://www.uvm.edu/medicine/nipn/documents/Esta blishingaChildHealthIP - AHow -toGuide_000.pdf  Gould J (2010). The Role of Regional Collaboratives: The California Perinatal Clinics in Perinatology 86. Quality Care Collaborative Model. 37: 71- Implementing a State- Level Quality Improvement Collaborative  October 2014. . Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, Rockville, MD. http://www.ah rq.gov/sites/default/files/wysiwyg/professionals/quality -patient- safety/quality- resources/tools/mednetresourceguide/mednetresourcedguide.pdf  Partnering to Improve Quality and Safety: A Framework for Working with Patient and Family Advisors . 2015. Hospital s in Pursuit of Excellence. http://www.hpoe.org/resources/hpoehretaha -guides/1828  Perinatal Improvement Community . Institute for Healthcare Improvement. http://www.ihi.org/engage/collaboratives/PerinatalImprovementCommunity/Pag es/default.aspx 17

19 2. Launching Initiatives Quality improvement collaboratives are driven and defined by their initiatives. These initiatives guide what your PQC is trying to accomplish, and of how you are trying to make a positive impact on perinatal care. Initiatives must be chosen carefully so that they have the best opportunity to make that positive impact, which can have the added benefit of bolstering support for the collaborative itself. The goal of this chapter is to provide guidance on launching these new initiatives, from the early stages of selecting a topic and identifying project leadership, to the eventual final stages of wrapping up the work and supporting sustained practice change. 2.1 Topic Selection The selection of a topic that can lend itself to a successful initiative is crucial, both because PQC resources will need to be used to support the s initiative, and because the initiative’ success can impact the credibility of the PQC itself. You can begin by assessing a topic ’s potential for success using several helpful criteria. The criteria proposed below come from the Institute for Healthcare Im provement’ s Breakthrough Series Methods to Create and Sustain Change in Healthcare , as well as from PQC leaders. Keep in mind that a successful initiative may not incorporate all of these criteria, but will likely include a majority of them. Criteria for evaluating potential initiative topics include:  Public Health Burden/ Population Impact of the I ssue. This refers to the actual scope of the issue being addressed How many mothers and /or babies are . impacted each year? Generally, initiatives are created to address significant and costly problems that affect a large number of people, but that may not always be the case. Still, for a recently formed PQC, addressing a highly visible problem that impacts a large number of patients can help establish participant interest. 18

20  Enthusiasm and E xistence of C hampions. An initiative cannot succeed Clinician without clinician support. Clinicians must be enthusiastic enough about the topic to be willing to make practice The Mississippi Perinatal Quality changes to support it. When Collaborative (MSPQC) selected its first assessing clinician enthusiasm, it is -person annual initiative at an in important to consider: 1) whether meeting by allowing its membership to there are providers who are vote on their preferences. Prior to the passionate and/or knowledgeable meeting, MSPQC’s steering committee about the issue who would be had selected two neonatal projects and 2) willing to serve as champions, (Golden Hour and Central Line whether clinicians more broadly are Associated Blood Stream Infection enthusiastic about and willing to Reduction) and two obstetrical projects make practice changes to address (Obstetrical Hemorrhage and Acute the issue. Providing an opportunity Severe Hypertension during for hospital teams to vote on Pregnancy) to present for a vote. The initiatives can also help to assess collaborative’s membership ultimately provider enthusiasm and readiness selected Golden Hour and Acute Severe for chang e. Hypertension during Pregnancy as their first initiatives. Availability of F unding. Without  funding to support it, your collaborative may find it challenging to launch a new initiative. Many PQCs operate with limited funding, meaning that there are few resources to put toward new initiatives. Every expenditure of resources has to be carefully considered. The ability to leverage other intitiatives or find external funding (such as grants) to other PQC resources to support an initiative topic allows for be conserved or used elsewhere. Alignment W ith State and National  Projects. It will be easier for your Priorities/ initiative to garner support if the topic is aligned with the priorities of key organizations (such as membership organizations that represent relevant clinicians, national advocacy groups, or state health departments). Alignment with the priorities of these organizations can help to bring those agencies to the table as key partners in the initiative, because they may see the local PQC work as an extension of their larger goals.  Knowledge About and Be nchmarks for B est Practice. Another method for increasing the credibility of your initiative is to select a topic with existing knowledge and benchmarks about best practices that can address the issue. If the topic has been studied, you may be able to find publications, policy statements, or practice guidelines related to it. Sources of benchmark information may vary depending on the topic, but could include organizations such as the National Quality Forum, the American Congress of Obstetricians and Gynecol ogists, and other similar groups.  Evidence -B ased or -Supported Interventions Available. Relying on interventions that have been shown to be effective helps to underscore your 19

21 PQC ’s commitment to making a positive impact. The existence of evidence to s work contributes to its credibility and increases the t the initiative’ suppor -in. Also, your work could be used to enhance the likelihood of participant buy evidence base for these interventions and demonstrate feasibility of implementation . Documented Variation in O utcomes.  ly incorporate one or An initiative will like practice changes that evidence shows to be “ ” more specific clinical best practices. You need to be able to demonstrate that, within your chosen topic, outcomes vary depending on which clinical lifornia has two mature The state of Ca practices are implemented. If you perinatal quality collaboratives that select a topic for your initiative have produced several toolkits for to where there is no clear evidence initiatives that have been widely practice is suggest that one clinical adopted in other states. For example, superior to others, you may not be the -medically Elimination of Non able to show that your initiative was Indicated (Elective) Deliveries Before 39 successful – or you may not be Weeks Gestational Age Toolkit , certain that any successes are truly developed through a collaboration due to your w ork. with the California Maternal Quality  Elsewhere. Prior Successes Care Collaborative, the California Adapting an initiative that was Department of Public Health, Maternal, successful elsewhere can provide a Child and Adolescent Health Division, straightforward opportunity for and the March of Dimes, has been success. There are several significant adopted and used successfully advantages to taking on an existing nationwide. The California Perinatal initiative, including: 1) that the Quality Care Collaborative’s Neonatal initiative design has already been Hospital Acquired Infection Prevention completed , 2) that the initiative has Toolkit has also been used widely by already been shown to be other states. successful as designed , and 3) that adapting a previous success could increase buy- in to the project from potential champions, key partners, and participants. By adapting a successful project, your PQC will have somewhere to go for support or questions about implementation.  Feasibility. A topic may meet all of the criteria in this section, but still not be suitable for your PQC. There are always other factors that could constrain the initiative from being successful. A PQC ’s leaders need to think broadly about these factors – some of which may be unique to your region or participants – before making a final decision to move forward. There are two important components of feasibility that you should consider: 20

22 ̶ Feasibility. Can the proposed interventions be implemented Implementation -world settings of the participants? Many criteria for assessing an in the real initiative were described in this section, but other factors – logistical, may pose significant barriers to success. organizational, cultural, etc. – ̶ Measurement Feasibility. Again considering the real -world settings of the participants, is it possible to measure the progress toward achieving, or , the initiative ’s goals? An initiative with outcomes that success in achieving cannot be feasibly measured should not be implemented. Process, outcome, and balancing measures need to be definable, and data needs to be accessible to support those measures. Project Leadership, Staffing, and Key Partners 2.2 An initiative requires strong leadership and broad support to succeed. Early in the process of selecting and designing an initiative, you will need to identify the people and organizations that will provide the solid foundation of leadership and support that the initiative requires. Key leadership and support groups that you need to identify include:  Expert Panel/Advisory Group. An expert panel or advisory group consists of clinicians, content experts, and patients/family m embers who design and provide overall leadership for the initiative. Expert panel members are not usually involved in the day -day oversight of the initiative, but generally serve to advise on the -to development of the initiative. Typically, an expert panel is formed to support each initiative. Expert panels are usually active prior to initiative launch in activities such as articulating the key drivers of the initiative, determining measurement strategies, developing data forms, creating education and evaluation plans, and recruiting participants.  Coordinator. The coordinator is the person with day- to -day responsibilities for overseeing the initiative. This person manages all activities needed to launch and maintain the initiative; provides updates to the expert panel; serves as the primary point of contact with participants; and oversees the collection and reporting of initiative data. This individual may or may not have QI expertise; if not, you will need to ensure that an advisor with this expertise is available to help guide the initiative.  Partner Organizations. Partner organizations are entities whose work and reach can magnify the work of your initiative. Partnering with credible outside organizations can greatly extend your capacity to work on a variety of projects. These groups can serve a variety of roles in an initiative, including providing content expertise, providing data, assisting with the development of educational or training materials, engaging participants, and aligning local initiatives with regional or national priorities. 21

23 Other roles may also be important, depending on the specifics of your initiative. To the greatest extent possible, you should identify and fill these roles early in the development process. Key Drivers and Design 2.3 Considerations Several aspects need to be considered when you are designing an initiative and determining how it will be implemented by participants. An important first step is to define what your PQC wants to accomplish with the initiative, by articulating its overall goal or aim. The overall goal should identify the quality issue bein g addressed, who will be impacted, and how the initiative hopes to address the issue. The aim overal l goal can be supplemented by a SMART (s pecific, measureable, achievable, results -focused, PQC initiatives from a variety of states series of have been showcased in a -bound) that more clearly articulates the time webinars hosted by CDC’s Division of improvement that will be accomplished by the - . These topic Reproductive Health initiative, as well as the timeline for achieving it. rs walk viewers through specific webina all of the issues addressed in this chapter, highlighting successes, er fleshed should be fur your initiative th The goals of challenges, and strategies. Speakers 2 out by artic ulating a set of “k ey drivers” ), (see Figure come from state PQCs in hought of a s short -term o r which c an be t Massachusetts, Florida, California, Ohio, tcomes that contribute to m eeting intermediate ou and New York as well as CDC, the provement, Institute for Healthcare Im ill l the larger g oal. Yo ur i nitiative w ikely include and the Vermont Oxford Network. nto d at fall i ey drivers th ifferent cate gories several k Topics covered include: (e.g., c ucational, evelopment, ed artnership d linical, p rder to etc.). K ey drivers n eed to b e accomplishe d i n o bstetric Quality Improvement O • Initiatives ish th accompl e larger g oal o f th e initiative. Defining • Neonatal Quality Improvement your k an h elp efore the initiative begins c ey drivers b Initiatives nterventions to you select the best evidence- based i • Neonatal Abstinence Syndrome achieve them. • Severe Maternal Morbidity • Hypertensive Disorders of Pregnancy one of these goals or outcomes can be realized N • Obstetric Hemo rrhage without thinking through the specific activities or Breastfeeding and Human Milk • practice changes needed to achieve them. As you are Quality Improvement Initiatives designing an initiative, each intervention should be 22

24 defined as specifically as possible, taking into account who will be responsible for implementing it, who is affected by it, and how it s hould be conducted. Initiative participants will need these details to understand the expectations of their participation and how these interventions will affect their usual practices. The outset of an initiative is also the best time to think through the measures and data sources that are needed to demonstrate your initiative’ s success. During the design phase, it is necessary to specify: 1) process, outcome, and balancing measures that can demonstrate progress or success in the context of the initiative ; 2) existing data that show the need for the initiative ; 3) sources of baseline data ; and 4) data that needs to be collected to assess measures and evaluate progress. The existence of current data and the ability of participants to collect your PQC need to be taken into account. The PQC must balance benefit with and report it to burden to hospitals. (See Chapter 3 for more information on data and measurement.) A key driver diagram, including many of the elements discussed above, can be developed to lay out a vision for the entire initiative. Below we have included the example of a key driver diagram developed for the Ohio Perinatal Quality Collaborative’ s Progesterone Project. Figure 2. Ohio Perinatal Quality Collaborative Progesterone Project Key Driver Diagram 23

25 2.4 Recruit ing and Engaging Participants Committed participants are a key component of a successful initiative, and you will benefit from figuring out how to recruit and engage them in your work. The participants in an that will be involved in actually carrying out initiative are the individuals and organizations s work, such as those tasked with conducting the interventions. the initiative’ Participants first need to be defined so that your PQC can take the appropriate steps to bring them into the project. Many PQC initiatives include hospitals as primary participants, but ude other potential participants may incl Meaningful patient and family outpatient clinics, community health centers, engagement is important and should private practices, public health agencies, be considered a priority for PQC -part w ebinar series, initiatives. In a 3 healthcare providers (physicians, nurses, etc.), Tara Bristol Rouse of the Perinatal as well as patients and their families. Quality Collaborative of North Carolina discusses various aspects of patient ch participant is unique, and tailored Ea engagement in the context of PQCs. In addition to describing engagement communication strategies need to be scenarios and activities, she provides developed that meet the needs of each group and discusses several resources and increase your chances of reaching them. potential funding sources for this work. needs what These strategies include not only Partnering with Patients and Family • how to be communicated to each group, but Members for Improved Outcomes that communication should take place. There • Training and Supporting Providers Successful Patient and Family for is a core set of information that every Engagement participant needs to know, including why the ging • Selecting, Orienting, and Enga topic is important, how they benefit from Patient and Family Advisors participating, and specifics about how they will participate. But this information should be tailored to each participant group. In addition, oup may be best reached using different channels or organizational each participant gr gatekeepers. For example, many states have regional perinatal networks that can be used to reach hospitals. In Illinois, regional network administrators help the Illinois Perinatal Quality Collaborative (ILPQC) provide weekly email updates on initiatives, facilitate monthly conference calls, and provide monthly QI data and resources for hospital -level support. Your PQC also needs to think through the specifics of the marketing or educationa l materials/offerings that will be developed to reach each group. Your collaborative will likely 24

26 develop general marketing materials to provide information about your PQC, but initiative- specific materials can also be created. Possible offerings include: Written materials (e.g., brochures, handouts) or in  -person presentation materials introducing the initiative; -board and  Recruitment packages that are specifically tailored to bringing sites on giving them the tools (e.g., participant forms) that they need to participate; Training for providers and other staff, focusing on practice changes, data  collection procedures, etc.; Newsletters that can provide overall or participant- specific progress updates  throughout the course of the project; erials (letters, certificates, etc.) for successful participants; and  Recognition mat  Patient/family educational materials providing information about the changes to patient care and engagement that will occur as a result of the initiative. 2.5 Collaborative Learning A key aspect of most PQC initiatives is collaborative learning, whereby you provide opportunities for participating sites to communicate and learn from each other ’s successes and challenges as the initiative progresses. This A traditional learning coll aborative can is one of the most important benefits to be time and resource intensive, especially in large states or with large participating in a collaborative – participants do numbers of participants. The California not have to undertake the QI project by Perinatal Quality Collaborative has themselves. They can work simultaneously with developed a mentor model to address other participants, discovering best practices this. In this model, two -person teams of clinicians experienced in QI (each and solutions to common problems that can consisting of one nurse and one make the initiative run more smoothly for physician) receive training in everyone. mentorship, and then are assigned to work with a small number of hospitals. The mentor teams work with hospitals Ma ny PQCs use the collaborative learning model that are similar to their own (so they are developed by the Institute for Healthcare familiar with the same issues), conduct Improvement called the Breakthrough Series monthly meetings, and provide Collaborative. This model typically involves coaching to their hospitals. bringing a small number of team members from participating sites together for several face- to - face learning sessions during the course of the initiative, supplemented by frequent virtual 25

27 meetings (such as teleconferences or webinars) to allow for regular discussions of progress and review of data (when available). Data should be shared in a timely manner so that it is participants can make ongoing changes to their implementation of the initiative as occurring. Participants may use techniques such as storyboarding to facilitate their discussions and depict their work as they progress from defining the problem, to implementing interventions, to reporting results. Chapter 4 provides additional details on the Breakthrough Series Collaborative, but note that collaborative learning can take many forms and is usually tailored to the needs of each PQC. Evaluation 2.6 Evaluation is a systematic process to determine merit, worth, value or significance of a 1 It involves the systematic collection of information about the activities, program or initiative. characteristics, and outcomes of programs (which may include interventions, policies, and specific projects) to make judgments about that program, improve program effectiveness, and /or inform decisions about future program development. In the context of a quality improvement collaborative, evaluation can show whether an initiative is successful or how it could be improved to make it more successful. To examine the progress of your initiatives, you need to develop an evaluation plan prior to launch of the project, implement it when the project begins, and regularly re- assess it throughout to ensure that you are capturing meaningful information to determi ne the progress and success of the initiative. See Chapter 3 for more information on data and measurement to support your evaluation; in addition, CDC ’s workbook on Develo ping an Effective Evaluation Plan may be a useful resource. 2.7 Initiative Wrap -Up and Sustainability Rather than being concerned about the sustainability of the initiative itself, it is more useful for your PQC to consider the sustainability of the culture and practice changes that you hope 1 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (1999). Framework for program evaluation in public health. MMWR 48(No. RR -11), ii -40. 26

28 to accomplish. From the start of an initiative, and certainly as it nears its end, your PQC needs to consider how it can support and sustain the To learn about a successful PQC ’s impact. initiative initiative, read the success story of the New York State Perinatal Quality Collaborative’s Obstetrical At th e end of the initiative, it is also important , found on the ject Improvement Pro for you to revisit its stated goal and assess CDC’s Perinatal Quality Collaboratives whether most participants were able to meet it. website. Individual participants also appreciate recognition for their own successes within the initiative. “Success ” ca n be defined in a variety of ways – for example, for meeting goals, for providing requested data, etc. – and all of these successes should be recognized. You can recognize participant successes in a variety of ways, including letters to hospital administrators, press releases, opportunities to present at PQC meetings, etc. Building specific recognition opportunities into the initiative can provide additional incentives to push for success and may also encourage participants to join in future PQC efforts. When an initiative wraps up, it is likely, however, that some participants will not have met their goals. Part of your work is to consider how to provide ongoing support for those who . With time and commitment, it may be possible for t hem to meet their did not meet targets goals, even if the formal initiative evaluation period has ended. It is worthwhile to consider methods, such as QI support calls to help teams identify opportunities for change, or mentorship from clinicians at hospitals that did meet tar gets , to support participants who wish to continue trying to meet their goals. The end of an initiative also provides an opportunity to examine its successes, challenges, and lessons learned. This includes looking at initiative -specific lessons (such as how well the interventions worked when implemented by participants, what the data showed about the impact of the initiative, etc.) as well as larger lessons that you can apply to future initiatives that your collaborative may undertake (such as successful methods for engaging participants, optimal communication strategies, etc.). These lessons should be disseminated among your PQC leadership, initiative staff, and initiative participants as appropriate. 27

29 2.8 Resources er information on launching initiatives: The following resources provide furth  American Evaluation Association . http://www.eval.org The Breakthrough Series: IHI  ’s Collaborative Model for Achieving Breakthrough Improvement . IHI Innovation Series white paper. Boston: Institute for Healthcare Improvement; 2003. http://www.ihi.org/resources/Pages/IHIWhitePapers/TheBreakthroughSeriesIHIsC ollaborativeModelforAchievingBreakthroughImprovement.aspx [free registration required]  Developing an Effective Evaluation Plan . CDC, Office on Smoking and Health, Division of Nutrition, Phyiscal Activty, and Obesity. http://www.cdc.gov/obesity/downloads/CDC -Workbook -508.pdf -Evaluation A Framework for Program Evaluation . CDC, Program Performance and Evalu ation  Office. http://www.cdc.gov/eval/framework/index.htm  Guide to Patient and Family Engagement in Hospital Quality and Safety . June 2013. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, Rockville, M D. http://www.ahrq.gov/professionals/systems/hospital/engagingfamilies/guide.html 28

30 3. Data and Measurement Quality improvement initiatives in healthcare are established to improve care and outcomes for a population of patients. Without data to show changes in processes and outcomes, there is no way to gauge whether your initiative is successful or whether it needs improvement. If you cannot demonstrate success, your PQC cannot establish itself as credible and valuable. This chapter focuses on the data that your collaborative needs to collect to monitor progress and document success. 3.1 Finding a “Good” Measure of Change To decide what data you need to collect for an initiative, you first need to identify measures that will detect the change you are trying to accomplish. These measures will be different for each initiative, but there are several characteristics that can be considered when evaluating whether a measure is useful. Good measures should be: 2 Reliable.  defines a reliable measure as one “ that is The National Quality Forum well defined and precisely specified so it can be implemented consistently within and across organizations and allows for comparab ility. ” Choosing reliable measures is important so that consistent data can be collected across multiple participating sites. Malleable.  Malleability means that the processes that affect the measure are under the control of the collaborative – meaning that the measure can be changed through the quality improvement intervention(s) you are implementing.  Feasible. Feasibility refers to the ability to collect the data associated with the measure. It should be possible to collect data in a timely manner, with low burden on data collectors and abstractors, and at a low cost. You should take advantage of existing data where possible. This list of characteristics of a good measure is by no means exhaustive. Your collaborative may choose to consider others as you are evaluating potential measures. 2 National Quality Forum (2015). Measure Evaluation Criteria and Guidance for Evaluating Measures for Endorsement. http://www.qualityforum.org/WorkArea/linkit.aspx?LinkIdentifier=id&ItemID=79434 29

31 3.2 Types and Sources of Measures and Data PQCs typically use three types of measures for their initiatives: process, outcome, and balancing. Below is an overview of these three types of measures, with examples of each from the Tennessee Initiative for Perinatal Quality Care’ s Tennessee Breastfeeding Promotion Initiative. To provide context for the measures, the Tennessee Breastfeeding Promotion promoting and Initiative aims to increase the initiation and duration of breastfeeding by Their immediate aim with this project is to supporting breastfeeding in the delivery setting. increase the percentage of infants who are exclusively fed breast milk at discharge. Process M easures. This type of measure is used to understand p rocesses, or how  a system works. Activities performed by the system in order to improve an outcome are measured. he Tennessee Breastfeeding Promotion Initiative’ T s process measures were written as yes, ” “ no, ” or questions that could be answered as “ ogress. ” They included: “in pr Process Measure Do you have a written breastfeeding policy that is routinely communicated to all health care staff? Does your center help all mothers initiate breastfeeding within one hour of birth? dic ated? in Does your center offer infants food or drink other than breast milk, other than when medically s  easures. This type of measure is used to understand the initiative’ Outcome M impact on a health outcome or other outcome of interest. The Tennessee Breastfeeding Promotion Initiative ’s outcome measures included: Outcome Measure Fraction exclusively feeding breast milk/all discharges Fraction feeding both breast milk and formula/all discharges Fraction exclusively feeding formula/ all births at discharge  Balancing M easures. Balancing measures are used to assess whether the new interventions may lead to unintended consequences, such as over -treatment for a health outcome of interest, which subsequently may have an adverse effect on another health outcome. 30

32 The Tennessee Breastfeeding Promotion Initiative’ s balancing measures include: Measure Name Number of infant readmissions to the hospital within 2 weeks of discharge for dehydration, failure to thri ve, and/or hyperbilirubinemia Newborn length of stay Mo st collaboratives do not develop their own measures for each initiative. Rather, they use existing measures from other sources, including: Other PQCs. Other PQCs are valuable resources for collaboratives seeking existing  measures. As discussed in Chapter Elliott Main of California Maternal 2 of this document, collaboratives Quality Care Collaborative provided often implement initiatives that significant detail on the California were developed elsewhere. The Maternal Data Center in CDC’s Perinatal collaborative that developed the Performance Measures and Data d initiative likely has measures an Collection webinar. You can also read goals that you can use or adapt for more about this data center in the your own implementation. on CDC’s Perinatal Quality success story  National Organizations. National Collaboratives website. organizations are also a valuable source of existing measures. measures from these organizations has its Using advantages and disadvantages. On the one hand, m easures from these organizations have likely been tested and found to be reliable and valid. On the other hand, these measures may not be specific enough to meet the needs of your initiative (although it is possible that they could be tailored or adapted to do so) . National organizations that may serve as a source of measures include: National Quality Forum  Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services  Perinatal Information Center National   Vermont Oxford Network  Pediatrix Medical Group  Centers for Disease Control and Prevention  National Committee for Quality Assurance American Medical Association  The Joint Commission   American Congress of Obstetricians and Gynecologists  New M easures. Developing new measures may be time- consuming and expensive, but your PQC may find it necessary if there are no suitable existing measures for your initiative. The development of new measures requires content expert review and input to ensure that the clinical concepts are clearly defined, as 31

33 well as review ed by staff responsible for coding and collecting the data to ensure -world practice will support the measurement concepts. Careful planning, that real multiple rounds of review and refinement, and input from all stakeholders can help ensure the feasibility and validity of the measures. To ensure that measures are clear and meaningful, pilot testing will be required. Pilot testing the measures allows you to understand how feasible it will be to implement them, identify areas where measure specifications are unclear or misleading, determin e whether the data collection can be incorporated into existing workflows, and gauge any other areas where changes need to be made -out. prior to a wider roll There are three types of data that are commonly used in PQC initiatives. Each has its own strengths and weaknesses that will need to be considered in conjunction with your initiative’ s goals. Administrative Data.  Administrative data includes vital statistics, insurance claims, hospital admission and discharge data, etc. Vital statistics are the type of administrative data used most often by PQCs. The New Jersey Perinatal Safety Collaborative used administrative data – specifically, birth certificate data collected by the state health department – to ative and addressing their make the initial case for forming their collabor state’s high C -section rate. The Ohio Perinatal Quality Collaborative has done extensive work to improve the accuracy and quality of birth registry data in their state. Read more about their work here .  Surve y Data. Collaboratives sometimes use survey data to inform their work, although this data is not typically used for quality improvement purposes. Survey data are often used for pilot testing new measures, gathering feedback from patients/family members who receive care, status updates during initiatives, and follow -ups after initiatives. Collaboratives may access existing survey data, or may develop their own surveys. The Massachusetts Perinatal Quality Collaborative uses data from the Leapfrog Hospital Survey to track progress on several initiatives. For instance, data on early elective delivery rates, based on this survey, are available publicly on their website. 32

34  Clinical ollected during the course of patient care. This Data. Clinical data are c -copy medical record. Much of includes all documentation in the electronic or hard the data that PQCs use for quality improvement initiatives are clinical data. This type of data, however, can be costly to collect because it comes from chart reviews and electronic medical record extractions. The Ohio Perinatal Quality Collaborative has used chart review to access clinical data for its progesterone project. The data collected via chart review include ite ms that can be easily found in the patient chart, such as prior spontaneous preterm births. They have been careful, however, not to ask participants for data that would be time- consuming or difficult to find in the chart. Other Data Considerations 3.3 Beyond deciding on the measures and data needed to support your initiatives, there are other important considerations that need to be taken into account:  Measurement Decisions. You will There are currently several sets of need to make several decisions measures available for early elective about issues impacting consistent from the American Congress delivery, measurement across the of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, The collaborative, including: Joint Commission, National Quality Harmonization. Measures ̶ Forum, and Leapfrog. Although each are available from a variety of has essentially the same definition, the sources, so harmonizing conditions that are considered these measures is important. justifications for early elective delivery Harmonizing requires different for each of these are agreement on one set of measures. This means that different measures to implement populations could not be compared if across the collaborative. The hospitals use different early elective use of different measures delivery measures. may impede cross -hospital comparisons. ̶ Standardization. Standardizing measures is important to ensure the consistency of data across participants. Participant differences may require tailored measure definitions to meet their unique local needs and circumstances, particularly for process measures. Outcome measures, however, typically cannot be tailored to individual participants because the data can then no longer be aggregated and compared across sites. 33

35  sions. After identifying measures for your initiatives, you will Data Collection Deci need to consider several other aspects related to the data collection effort, each of which can influence participant burden. Key decisions include: Number of M Asking participants to collect more measures raises ̶ easures. the burden placed on staff during data collection. You should aim to collect the minimum number of measures that will allow you to show the impact of several PQC leaders have suggested that two to four the initiative – measures is a reasonable amount. You can also reduce burden by using measures that are already being collected by participants. Sampling. Depending upon the initiative and the resources available, it ̶ may be necessary to select a sample of patients for data collection purposes. This can be useful when a high -burden data collection method, such as If sampling is necessary, it is important to manual chart review, is required. - consult with a statistician to ensure that your methods are sound. In small tives, sampling is relatively rare because it is complicated and scale QI initia resource- intensive to do correctly. ̶ Frequency of D ata Collection. QI initiatives are dependent on timely data to be successful. Data need to be collected often enough to show change through the initiative and provide ongoing feedback, but ’s implementation ’s participants. without becoming burdensome for the initiative External Approvals and Agreements. Often, other entities or organizations will  need to approve your projects, plans to collect and share data, and how you wish to use data. These approvals and agreements can be complex to navigate and generally vary from state to state. Some of these external concerns include: ̶ Data Sharing Agreements. Business Associate Agreements and Data Use Agr eements are often required before participants can share data with the collaborative Business Associate Agreements are contracts between a . Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) covered entity and a HIPAA business associate, and thes e contracts are used to protect personal health information in accordance with HIPAA guidelines. A Data Use Agreement is a contractual document used for the transfer of nonpublic data that is subject to some restriction on its use. Although a data sharing agreement may not be needed for all initiatives, some collaboratives put them in place routinely to protect all parties if unforeseen issues arise. These agreements are usually needed when requesting patient- level data with identifiers. 34

36 ̶ Institutional Review Boards (IRBs). IRBs exist to ensure that human are protected in research projects. In most cases, quality subjects improvement is not considered research, and therefore, is IRB review is not required . Still, your collaborative (or individual initiative participants) may choose to have all projects reviewed by an IRB (or other The Department of Health and Human review or ethics boards) and about QI projects t Services statemen and human subjects research makes formally declared non several important points that you must research or exempt, and to consider when designing your ensure that individual rights are adequately protected. initiative. The statement itself contains This statement more detail, but two key questions to e from th consider are: Department of Health and Human Services provides 1. Does your QI project involve hospitals with guidance research? about QI projects and the 2. Does that research involve human mittees. role of their IRB com subjects? Several PQCs, in fact, have If the answer to either of these provided this statement to may need to questions is “yes,” you their local IRBs to make it seek IRB approval for your initiative. clearer that their initiatives are not research activities. ̶ State Data Committees. Certain states require approval from state data committees to access vital records or discharge data. This additional approval may require the collaborative to provide training or clearance forms for every person who will interact with the data.  Data Management. Once an initiative begins, you will need to have systems in place t o manage participant data securely. Data management considerations need to be taken into account well in advance of receiving initiative data, including: ̶ Security. Due to HIPAA requirements, certain data sets, particularly those with patient identifiers, have specific security requirements for data storage, protected computers in locked including (in some cases) having password- rooms with restricted access. Generally, collaboratives try to avoid these security requirements by using only fully de- identified clinical data. Still, when de -identification is not possible, your collaborative will need to devote significant resources to ensuring that all data is properly secured. 35

37 ̶ Database Infrastructure. Depending on the complexity of the data your collaborative collects and how you use it, you will need to invest in adequate database The Tennessee Initiative for Perinatal ture to house your infrastruc REDCap Quality Care (TIPQC) utilizes data. Most collaboratives rely (Research Electronic Data Capture) , a on existing databases due to -based application free and secure web the expense of building a new designed exclusively to support data one. Often, new collaboratives capture. REDCap provides an intuitive rely on something as simple as interface for data entry, which utilizes an Excel spreadsheet to -time data validation, real manage and analyze data for branching/skip logic, calculated field, their first initiatives. As your -trails compliant with HIPAA and audit collaborative grows and security requirements. Users from collects more data, you may various sites and institutions across the find use for more advanced state can input their data into common options, such as investing in project databases using the secure database software or working authentication and built -in data access with outside organizations that groups. Additionally, TIPQC has can assist with managing data. developed a reporting functionality Several Organizations. Outside  which allows individual users to organizations, includin g the National generate sophisticated, customized Perinatal Information Center/Quality reports of their group’s data. They can Analytic Services and the Vermont easily visualize their data as run cha rts Oxford Network, provide data (as it is entered) and determine if their collection and reporting tools, data changes are leading to real benchmarking and analysis, and the improvements. opportunity to participate in QI initiatives to member hospitals. Membership in one of these organizations could circumvent the need to invest in database software (and the expertise needed to use that software), or it may supplement your existing efforts. The Pediatrix Medical Group, through its also Center for Research, Education, and Quality, supports QI data collection among its member practices. 3.4 Data Analysis To assess the impact of an initiative, your data will need to be analyzed on an ongoing basis. You will need to identify the appropriate comparison benchmarks for your initiatives. There are several comparisons to consider:  Comparison to P articipant Baseline . This is typically how PQC initiatives are analyzed. In this type of analysis, a participant is compared only to its own baseline 36

38 data to look for improvement. Run charts and statistical process control charts are helpful for such analyses. (See Chapter 4 for more details on these charts.) Comparison to O Participants . In this type of analysis, data from one ther  participant are compared to data from other participants. In this circumstance, it is important to ensure that the participant sites are comparable, with similar patient populations. Comparison Against National Standards .  In this type of analysis, data from participants in your collaborative are compared to national standards. It’s useful for your collaborative to examine racial, ethnic,  Disparities Analysis. language, socioeconomic, and other disparities when analyzing the impact of your initiatives, or when determining which initiatives to undertake. Disparity can be studied in a variety of ways, and existing PQCs have looked at this issue by examining outcomes (fo -to -hospital basis) by r an overall initiative or on a hospital racial or ethnic group, using race/ethnicity in risk adjustment, or regularly including disparities data in the QI reports that are sent to individual hospitals. Once disparities are identified, participating hospitals can work on reducing them by developing targeted approaches. Disparities Solutions Center assachusetts General Hospital provides several The at M resources generated from their work toward eliminating racial and ethnic disparitie s, including their . This report provides an Annual Report on Equity in Healthcare Quality of quality by race, example of how a hospital system can measure key components ethnicity, and language; how they identify areas for quality improvement; and outlines the progress of MGH’s initiatives to address disparities. Da ta analysis is critical for making your data actionable and leading to actual improvements in quality. Analysis tools that your collaborative can use to examine your data are described in more detail in Chapter 4. 3.5 Data Sharing Each collaborative chooses to share data among participants in different ways. Complete transparency – where all participants can see all of each other ’s data – is rare, and requires that all participants have agreements in place that address the situation. Initiative- specific results are rarely shared with the public, except in aggregate form. 37

39 PQCs take a variety of different approaches to sharing data: The New York State Perinatal Quality Collaborative shares all results openly within the • collaborative, and each participant can see the data from all others. • The Ohio Perinatal Quality Collaborative (OPQC) puts aggregate data for each project on its public website. Site- specific data is available only to the participants themselves and to OPQC leadership for QI use, such as asking a site to describe techniques used to achieve an outcome that other sites find difficult. • The Tennessee Initiative for Perinatal Quality Care shares statewi de aggregate data with all participants, but provides participant -level data only to each site. Each participant, however, is encouraged to share their data with others, and most do so. 3.6 Resources The following resources and articles may be helpful to consult to provide further information on data and measurement:  Clayton HB, Sappenfield WM, Gulitz E, Mahan CS, Petersen DJ, Stanley KM, and Salihu HM (2013). The Florida investigation of primary late preterm and cesarean delivery: The accuracy of birth certificate and hospital discharge records. Maternal and Child Hea lth Journal 17(5): 869- 878.  National Perinatal Information Center/Quality Analytic Services. http://www.npic.org Park S, Sappenfield WM, Bis h C, Bensyl DM, Goodman D, and Menges J (2011).  Reliability and validity of birth certificate prepregnancy weight and height among Maternal and Child Health women enrolled in prenatal WIC program: Florida, 2005. Journal 17(5): 851- 859.  Pediatrix Medical Group, Center for Research, Education, and Quality . https://www.pediatrix.com/body.cfm?id=2733&oTopID=48  Quality Improvement Activities FAQs . U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Office for Human Research Protections. http://www.hhs.gov/ohrp/policy/faq/quality -improvement- activities/  Vermont Oxford Network . https://public.vtoxford.org 38

40 4. Quality Improvement Methods There are several methods used for quality improvement in healthcare, and hospitals and clinicians may vary in their knowledge of these methods. To successfully implement a QI initiative, all participants will need to have at least a basic knowledge of QI. This chapter gives an introduction to QI models, lays out some considerations for any collaborative planning or conducting QI initiatives around perinata l care, and provides information on existing resources related to QI. Quality Improvement Models 4.1 QI models provide a common framework for PQC stakeholders and initiative participants to discuss and implement changes. In this section, we present an overview of several QI models commonly used in healthcare. Each model has a slightly different focus and may work better for some types of initiatives than others. You should identify the model that you feel works best for your collaborative and your initiative. Some PQCs even allow participants within a single initiative to use different QI models, particularly if they already have specific experience with one particular model. Below, we describe several QI models that are In addition to describing how their suited to healthcare quality initiatives, along well- PQCs select topics to address, Jeffrey with links to resources where you can learn more Gould (California Perinatal Quality Care Collaborative) and Peter Grubb about each one. This list is not exhaustive; you (Tennessee Initiative for Perinatal can seek out other models, or combine multiple Quality Care) explain their QI processes models, if you feel that makes sense for your Quality Improvement Principles in the collaborative. and Getting Started webinar. Mod el for Improvement. This is the QI model most commonly used by PQCs. It was developed by the Associates in Process Improvement and is used by the Institute for Healthcare Improvement as the model that guides their work. This model combines clinical expertise with quality improvement expertise and focuses on learning as well as improvement. 39

41 Using this model, collaboratives would begin by considering three key questions: What are we trying to accomplish?  This question is used to clarify the goals of the ive. initiat What changes can we make that will result in improvement? Many PQCs implement  initiatives that have already been successfully implemented elsewhere and are likely to result in improvement. But changes implemented by PQCs may also be original ideas fro m clinicians/other staff based on their experience with the quality problem. How will we know that a change led to mprovement? Measurement will be required  to understand whether or not the proposed initiative actually leads to improvement. the initiative are identified and agreed upon, allocation of staff and Once the aims of resources for the project can occur. Measures, which are crucial to identify a change as an improvement, are also chosen at this time. The proposed changes are then selected and . A “ Plan -Do -Study- tested ” (PDSA) cycle (see below) is used for rapid, small tests of the Act proposed changes that are considered and, if they result in improvement, the changes are implemented. Implementation, initially on a small scale, is continually tested a s scale increases, and efforts are successful, implementation continues to spread. A PDSA cycle generally proceeds as follows:  . Plan the test of change including how it will be performed, what the Plan proposed outcomes might be, and how data will be collected and reviewed.  Do . Perform the test of change (generally on a small scale), identify unexpected problems that occur, and collect data.  Study (or Check) . Conduct data analysis, compare the data with predictions, summarize the information, and discuss possible improvements or changes to your initial plan.  Act . Refine or modify your proposed changes by what was learned, and begin planning for the next cycle of testin g. The Institute for Healthcare Improvement developed a learning approach called The Breakthrough Series: IHI ’s Collaborative Model for Achieving Breakthrough Improvement, which many PQCs use when implementing their initiatives. This does not replace the Model for Improvement, but rather is another resource that can allow participants to learn from each 40

42 other during an initiative. The Breakthrough Series Collaborative model is generally organized for a short -term project (usually not more than 15 months) with a relatively small number of participating teams (typically no more than 30). Participants implement the initiative locally, and over the course of the project, they attend in -person Learning Sessions to discuss allenges and best practices. progress and learn from one another ’s ch Resources where you can learn more about the Model for Improvement and the Breakthrough Series Collaborative include:  ’s Collaborative Model for Achieving Breakthrough The Breakthrough Series: IHI . IHI Innovation S eries white paper. Boston: Institute for Healthcare Improvement Improvement; 2003. http://www.ihi.org/resources/Pages/IHIWhitePapers/TheBreakthroughSeriesIHIsC ollaborativeModelforAchievingBreakthroughImprovement.aspx [free registration required] How to Improve . Institute for Healthcare Improvement, Cambridge, MA.  http://www.ihi.org/resources/Pages/HowtoImprove/default.aspx Six Sigma. This model focuses on reducing variation and eliminating process defects. (A “defect ” is a deviation from a defined norm or standar d, regardless of the industry.) Its philosophy asserts that by controlling the inputs to a process, you can control (and reduce defects in) its outputs. Although this approach has been successfully applied in healthcare settings, not all initiatives are suitable for Six Sigma because it focuses on standardization (which is not always appropriate ). This model relies on a variation of PDSA referred to as DMAIC (Define -Measure -Improve -Control) or DMADV (Define -Measure- Analyze - -Analyze Design istically oriented, and initiatives often use a range of statistical tools -Verify). It is stat and analyses to determine whether improvement is occurring. This requires some expertise in these statistical methods to take full advantage of this model. Resources where you can learn more about Six Sigma include:  What is Six Sigma? American Society for Quality. http://asq.org/learn -about - quality/six -sigma/overview/overview.html  What is Six Sigma? iSixSigma. http://www.isixsigma.com/new -to -six - sigma/getting -started/what- six -sigma/ 41

43 Lean Production System. The Lean model originated in automobile manufacturing but has been applied to a variety of industries, including healthcare. This model focuses on reducing waste and eliminating non -value- added activities from a process. It focuses on the process product itself. By following the Lean flow that results in the end product, rather than the end model, you would examine all steps in a process and determine if any are unnecessary or inefficient. The process would then be redesigned to improve efficiency and/or eliminate unnecessary steps. Within healthcare, Lean and Six Sigma are sometimes combined into the “Lean Six Sigma ” model, which focuses on using QI initiatives to increase patient satisfaction and reduce errors. This model the statistical approach of Six Sigma along with the process flow focus of uses Lean. Resources where you can learn more about the Lean Production System, and Lean Six Sigma, include: Going Lean in Health Care. IHI Innovation Series white paper. Cambridge, MA:  Institute for Healthcare Improvement; 2005. http://www.ihi.org/resources/Pages/IHIWhitePapers/GoingLeaninHealthCare.aspx [free registration required]  Lean Six Sigma in Healthcare . American Society for Quality. http://asq.org/healthcaresixsigma/lean -six -sigma.html What is Lean? American Society for Quality.  asq.org/learn -about - http:// quality/lean/overview/overview.html  What is Lean? Lean Enterprise Institute. http://www.lean.org/WhatsLean/ 4.2 Considerations When Planning/Conducting a Quality Improvement Initiative As noted previously, the participants you will rely on to implement your initiatives will likely have a range of experience with QI. It will benefit the collaborative to ensure that QI expertise is available both at the collaborative level and at the level of the participating teams. QI expertise does not have to come from a content expert, however; several PQCs have accessed clinicians in other fields (such as surgery, which has a lengthy history with QI) to get this knowledge. When experts are not available locally, online resources (such as those from the Vermont Oxford Network or the Institute for Healthcare Improvement) could be provided to give key team members a minimal grounding in QI. 42

44 While conducting and analyzing the results of an initiative, there are several strategies and tools you can use to assist in determining whether or not your initiative has resulted in improvement: Pareto Charts. Pareto Principle ”  A Pareto chart provides a visual depiction of the “ ”80- ”), which states that a small percentage of efforts (also known as the 20 Rule (the 20%) produce a large percentage of results (the 80%). The Pareto Principle is applied by looking at the multiple causes that contribute to a quality problem and assessing which have the greatest impact on it. By targeting initiatives to the (the “vital few causes that make the greatest impact on the problem ”) , you can focus your efforts on addressing those causes, and you will likely make a larger ssing less impact on the problem than by taking a broader approach or addre significant contributing factors. The Pareto chart is usually a bar chart that shows the relative size of each contributing factor, allowing you to see which are most significant. The following online resources provide more information about Pareto charts: ̶ Pareto Chart . Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. http://healthit.ahrq.gov/health -it-tools -and -resources/workflow - assessment -health -workflow -tools/pareto -chart -it-toolkit/all ̶ Pareto Chart . American Society for Quality. http://asq.org/learn -about - quality/cause- analysis -tools/overview/pareto.html ̶ Pareto Diagram . Institute for Healthcare Improvement, Cambridge, MA. http://www.ihi.org/resource s/Pages/Tools/ParetoDiagram.aspx [free registration required] 43

45 Figure 3. Pareto chart from Tennessee Initiative on Perinatal Quality Care 44

46  A process flowchart can be used in multiple ways to guide Process Flowchart. improvement. It is often helpful to have sites develop a flowchart of their current process on the issue that is targeted for improvement. This can be helpful in identifying barriers, inefficiencies, and gaps. A process flowchart can also be developed to help the site depict how a process should operate in that site. It is important to remember that processes need to be adapted to the local context. In healthcare, the “ process ” could represent the steps needed to provide care at recommended quality standards. In reality, care may not always be PQCs have taken several different provided as represented in the approaches to disseminating QI flowchart, but if the flowchart knowledge to their members: depicts a best practice, your The Louisiana Birth Outcomes • initiatives are likely designed to Initiative received several years of ensure that care is provided (as “coaching” from clinicians affiliated frequently as possible) as depicted with the Institute for Healthcare in the flowchart. The flowchart can Improvement’s (IHI’s) Perinatal serve as a reminder of what you are Improvement Community to learn trying to achieve, as well as a tool for how to implement QI. identifying where problems can • In Ohio, the state replaced Regional occur. Perinatal Education Coordinators The following online resources with Quality Improvement provide more information about Coordinators and assigned them to process flowcharts: specific projects aimed at the leading causes of adverse health outcomes in the state. This model . Institute for Flowchart ̶ has been effective in many areas of Healthcare Improvement, health care, including perinatal Cambridge, MA. projects with the Ohio Perinatal http://www.ihi.org/resources/ Quality Collaborative. Pages/Tools/Flowchart.aspx • The Tennessee Initiative for [free registration required] Perinatal Quality Care invested ̶ What is a Process Flowchart? resources to allow its Project American Society for Quality. -certified Director to become an IHI -about - http://asq.org/learn Improvement Advisor. With that -analysis - quality/process training, the director is able to tools/overview/flowchart.html provide QI coaching to hospitals throughout the state, and she has spoken at conferences or annual Root cause Root Cause Analysis.  meetings of several other PQCs. analysis can be used during the initiative planning process to identify errors that contribute to the quality problem. This can also be linked to the process flow chart. The federal 45

47 Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality defines it as a way to “ identify underlying problems that increase the likelihood of errors while avoiding the trap 3 of focusing on mistakes by individuals. ” Collaboratives may also find it useful to employ cause and effect diagrams to provide a visual representation of the results of their root cause analysis. A cause or “Ishikawa diagram ”) shows fishbone diagram” and effect diagram (also called a “ the ultimate problem you are trying to improve, along with branches that represent potential causes. The following online resources provide more information about root cause analysis (and cause and effect diagrams): Root Cau ̶ . Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, Patient se Analysis Safety Primer. https://psnet.ahrq.gov/primers/primer/10 . Department of Veterans Affairs, National Center for ̶ Root Cause Analysis Pati ent Safety. http://www.patientsafety.va.gov/professionals/onthejob/rca.asp Failure Modes and Effects Analysis (FMEA). FMEA is another method suitable  for use early in initiative planning. Similar to root cause analysis, FMEA is used for examining the causes of a quality problem, but this methodology takes a proactive approach to considering a process and attempting to identify the points where it might fail. It also attempts to pinpoint the potential effects of the identified failures. The following online resources provide more information about FMEA: Failure Modes and Effects Analysis (FMEA) Tool . Institute for Healthcare ̶ Improvement, Cambridge, MA. http://www.ihi.org/resources/Pages/Tools/FailureModesandEffectsAnalysisT ool.aspx [free registration required] ̶ Healthcare Failure Modes and Effects Analysis . Department of Veterans Affa irs, National Center for Patient Safety. http://www.patientsafety.va.gov/professionals/onthejob/hfmea.asp ̶ Quick Guide to Failure Modes and Effects Analysis . iSixSigma. http://www.isixsigma.com/tools -templates/fmea/quick -guide -failure -mode - and -effects -analysis/ 3 Root Cause Analysis . August 2014. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, Rockville, MD. https://psnet.ahrq.gov/primers/primer/10 46

48  A run chart is one of the most basic yet powerful tools to examine Run Charts. whether your initiatives are leading to improvements. It depicts one data point and shows how it changes over time. Collaboratives generally consider this type of chart to be essential for understanding whether an initiative is working as intended. The following online resources provide more information about run charts: ̶ Run Chart Tool . Institute for Healthcare Improvement, Cambridge, MA. http://www.ihi.org/resources/Pages/Tools/RunChart.aspx [free registration required] Poteet, J and Jeffers, D. Understanding and Annotating Run Charts . ̶ https://opqc.net/si tes/bmidrupalpopqc.chmcres.cchmc.org/files/Learning% 20Sessions/September%2028%202015%20Learning%20Session/130- 215_Understanding%20and%20Annotating%20Run%20Charts_Poteet%20J effers_%20St%20Charles%20II.pdf Control charts function similarly to run charts,  Statistical Process Control Charts. in that both look at data points over time. Where this chart differs, however, is with the addition of statistical decision limits (or control limits) that allow you to examine the variation that will occur within the data you collect. Some level of variation is natural and unavoidable; this is referred to as “ common cause variation. ” The control limits help you determine when the data indicate a more alarming level of variation, called “ special cause variation, ” which may indicate a problem. Control charts can also keep you from overreacting to changes by defining accept able limits for data variation. The following online resources provide more information about statistical process control charts: ̶ Statistical Process Contr ol . American Society for Quality. http://asq.org/learn - about -quality/statistical -control/overview/overview.html -process 4.3 Resources The following reso urces provide more information related to QI and conducting QI initiatives: American Society for Quality.  http://asq.org/index.aspx  Associates in Process Improvement . http://www.apiweb.org/  The Deming Institute . https://www.deming.org/  Institute for Healthcare Impr ovement . http://www.ihi.org/Pages/default.aspx  National Institute for Children ’s Health Quality http://www.nichq.org/  Vermont Oxford Network . https://public.vtoxford.org/ 47

49 5. Dissemination Dissemination is one of the most important components to ensuring the success of a collaborative. From communicating action plans to the results of an initiative, the dissemination process needs to be well planned to maximize results and ensure sustainability of the collaborative. This chapter will outline various ways that collaboratives have approached developing dissemination plans; engaging and partnering with patients, family members, and other stakeholders; and customizing information for the needs of different audiences. 5.1 Components of a Dissemination Plan While dissemination plans will inevitably vary depending on the needs of each collaborative, there are several components that should be included in any plan. Although some of these components will need to be refined over time, it is important to begin thinking about each of these components as early as possible to consider how they may evolve. Key components of a dissemination plan include:  Overview. For initiative -specific dissemination activities, you should Project include a description of the initiative and its goals. This overview should include information about what changes the project is aiming to accomplish and the value of the project for the collaborative. You should consider what you would like others to know about the initiative.  Dissemination Goals. This section should outline what you are hoping to achieve through dissemination. It is important to identify and prioritize short -term and long- term goals. Short -term goals may include gaining feedback on futur e initiatives , educating hospital staff , enhancing , engaging patients and families collaborative learning , or informing providers about the value of QI work. Long- term goals may include affecting policy change, receiving future funding , or influencing sustainability of the collaborative. Different dissemination methods may be appropriate for different goals, and would likely involve different content, different channels for dissemination, and different target audiences. 48

50  Target Audiences. It is important to define who you will target with your dissemination activities. You should be as specific as possible about who can benefit from the results of your work, and who you wish to reach. You will have multiple target audiences within your d issemination plan (even for one initiative), and it is essential to understand their information needs and how to communicate with each. It may also be helpful to define primary and secondary audiences and to allocate resources according to audience importance. Key target audiences to consider include: Policy makers ; ̶ PQCs communicate with their ̶ Funders ; stakeholders and target audiences in a variety of ways. Here are a few Payers and purchasers ̶ ; examples: ; Hospitals (or other participants) ̶ • The Tennessee Initiative for ; Professional organizations ̶ Perinatal Quality Care sends a zine to subscription monthly e- ̶ ; Patients and families hold ers and annual reports to ; ̶ Stakeholders/partners stakeholders and members of the collaborative. ̶ State agencies (e.g., health The Perinatal Quality Collaborative • departments, Medicaid offices, of North Carolina coordinates its etc.) ; social media posts on Fa cebook and ̶ Other collaboratives ; . The pages post the same Twitter content on the same days. ̶ State hospital associations ; and The Massachusetts Perinatal Quality • . The general population ̶ Northern and the Collaborative New England Perinatal Quality  Key Messages . Once you have Improvement Network hold regular defined your target audiences and annual conferences for their n applicable, their needs (and whe membership. examined the results of your initiatives), you can consider the key messages that you would like to share. These messages should be easy to read and visually appealing , With a variety of target audiences, it is important to be transparent with communications and mindful of how communication intended for one group could be perceived by another. Communications are meant to bring value to all groups, not to antagonize them. For example, patients value transparency, but physicians may prefer that communications be more circumspect. It is important to strike a balance in what you release to be sure that your messages are valuable and not easily misconstrued. You should consider having your messages reviewed by members of your audience to ensure they are saying what you intend them to say. 49

51  Channels. This part of a dissemination plan outlines the channels that will be used to effectively communicate with your target audiences. It is important to al media, etc.) and make a distinction between sources (e.g., websites, soci messengers (e.g., professional organizations, physician champions, etc.). When considering potential messengers, you first need to identify the individuals or lso organizations that are viewed as credible to your target audiences. You may a need to build relationships (if they don ’t already exist) to engage the help of these groups. Potential messengers include: ̶ Professional organizations (e.g., local chapters of the American Congress of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, the American Academy of Pediatrics, etc.) ; State health departments ̶ ; Hospitals ; and ̶ Community and family organizations that focus on maternal and child health . ̶ When deciding on appropriate sources, it is useful to consider how accessible the is to your intended target audience, as well as the resources (both money source and staff time) that will be needed to use the source. For example, effectively using social media requires that you maintain a consistent presence and post : frequently. Potential sources include es ̶ Websit ̶ Twitter Facebook ̶ ̶ Listservs Email ̶ ̶ Press releases blasts Toolkits ̶ ̶ Webinars Journals ̶ ̶ Conferences Timing. Timing and frequency of dissemination will vary greatly by initiative and  target audience. Collaboratives may have weekly, monthly, or annual communications with various stakeholders.  Responsible Staff. It is important to designate staff to take responsib ility for dissemination. In most instances, the collaborative’ s operational or administrative staff will handle these activities. Staff members could be responsible for creating the content, disseminating it through various channels, and checking the channels frequently (where applicable) to ensure that a consistent presence is maintained. Collaboratives with a significant community focus may wish to engage patients and families to serve as community advocates. These advocates can disseminate information at events and on social media, potentially reaching more patients and families. 50

52  Budget requirements for dissemination are frequently underestimated. Budget. Effective dissemination can involve a significant investment of resources and planning. The budget should include plans for travel, layout and printing, space rental costs, conference fees, and other items. Media buys and advertisements, if your collaborative chooses to undertake these types of activities, can also be quite In-kind contributions from partners who can assist with promotion expensive. may be helpful. Evaluation. Evaluation is most effective when it is planned from the start. Decide  early how you will evaluate the success of your dissemination efforts, selecting measurable criteria for each dissemination activity. While evaluation activities will depend on your budget and number of dedicated staff, there are several ways to build evaluation activities into your dissemination efforts. Google Analytics can be useful to determine reach of materials. It can track search terms, hashtag usage, or or example, the California Maternal Quality how many times a link was clicked. F Care Collaborative used Google Analytics to gather information related to a toolkit release. It tracked how many times the toolkit was downloaded, from what states downloads originated, whether users opened the l ink from an email or online, and even whether users looked at the toolkit but did not download it. Follow -up surveys can also be useful to assess appeal of communications, preference of communication mode, and suggestions for improvement. 5.2 Resources The following resources and articles provide more information related to dissemination: Development of a Planning Tool to Guide  Carpenter D, Nieva V, Albaghal T, et al. Research Dissemination. I n: Henriksen K, Battles JB, Marks ES, et al., editors. Advance (Volume 4: Programs, s in Patient Safety: From Research to Implementation Tools, and Products). Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, Rockville, MD. 2005 Feb. h ttp://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK20603/  Randall, Susannah (2005). Using Communications Approaches to Spread Improvement . The Health Foundation. h ttp://www.health.org.uk/publicati on/using -communications -approaches - spread -improvement 51

53 6. Sustainability Two types of sustainability are most relevant to a PQC: sustainability of the collaborative itself, and sustainability of the results of your initiatives . In this chapter, we focus on the sustainability of the collaborative. The goal of this chapter is to provide information on how to plan for -term collaborative sustainability. sustainability, as well as what supports may be helpful for long Sustainab 6.1 ility Planning ’t require a written plan. More important than Planning for sustainability is critical, but it doesn sustainability having a formal, written plan is ensuring that the right people are involved in the planning process, that you start planning at an early stage (soon after your collaborative begins implementing initiatives), and that you frequently revisit your needs for sustainability. Here are some issues to consider when planning for sustainability: Priorities for S ustainment . It ’s helpful  to plan for a future with different funding levels – either less or more – than you currently have. Accordingly, it’ s useful to prioritize which operations of your collaborative need to be sustained in order for it to function. These core operations need to be defined, and around that core, you can identify the supports needed to continue your work. Your collaborative may also find it helpful to prioritize in tiers. For example, you could prioritize a small core of operations to sustain with very little funding, a larger set of functions for a medium level of funding, and a broad set of functions with a large amount of funding.  Funding. Determining the level of funding that your collaborative needs to operate may be part of the process of identifying priorities for sustainment. The priorities that you identify will dictate the level of funding that the collaborative needs to function, as well as where the funds will be used. It ’s helpful to begin considering and seeking new funding sources before they will be needed. Possible funding sources may include: ̶ Public Funding, from F ederal, State, or L ocal Sources. These are the sources that most commonly support PQCs. Some PQCs receive funding through grants, contracts, or cooperative agreements, while others are supported through these sources because they are housed within organizations such as state health departments. Examples of public fund ing sources that support PQCs include CDC, state departments of health, and state Medicaid authorities. 52

54 ̶ unding, from Payers, F oundations, and O rganizations with an Private F erinatal Care. Interest in P Similar to public funding sources, some PQCs receive their funding through traditional contractual or grant arrangements, while others are housed within private organizations, such as hospital associations. Examples of private funding sources that support PQCs include state hospital associations and March of Dimes. Membership ̶ Fees or The Northern New England Perinatal Several PQCs receive Dues. Quality Improvement Network, the funding from collaborative California Perinatal Quality Care members who pay Collaborative, the Florida Perinatal membership fees or dues. Quality Collaborative, and the IHI This approach provides an Perinatal Collaborative all charge ongoing funding source membership fees. that is controlled by the coll aborative. Staffing.  A collaborative relies on many people, including a large number of volunteer staff. You should try to identify the staff positions – both paid and volunteer – that need to be filled in order for your PQC to function. Different strateg ies are needed to sustain staffing for paid versus volunteer positions. For paid positions, sustainability will depend mostly on funding. For volunteer positions, sustainability will depend more on relationship building. Volunteers will be more likely to spend their free time on QI activities if they feel the collaborative is making an impact on important issues and if they feel valued. Types of collaborative staff include: Collaborative-L Leadership. These are the leaders who provide ̶ evel oversight for the entire collaborative. This level of leadership probably includes the collaborative’ s executive director, as well as an oversight committee with representatives from key stakeholder organizations. Initiative -L ̶ Leadership. A collaborative also relies on clinical, evel operational, and administrative staff to lead initiatives. Depending on the number of ongoing initiatives within your collaborative, the executive director may fill this role or others who are passionate about the initiative may lead it. Operat ions. Staff are also needed to run the collaborative on a day- ̶ -day to basis. Operations staff include those who coordinate meetings, run websites, collect and manage initiative data, and develop marketing and dissemination materials, along with other activities.  Organizational Home. It’s worthwhile to consider possible alternatives for the collaborative ’s long -term home. Although it may not be possible to locate your PQC within an ideal home, it ’s still helpful to consider what an ideal home might be. You should also consider the stability of your current arrangement, and 53

55 whether that organization is able and/or willing to continue hosting your collaborative in the future. If a different organizational home would provide more stability for your PQC, you should try to develop partnerships that could allow the collaborative to move if the opportunity arises. Another option may be establishing the collaborative as an independent organization, such as a 501(c)(3) non -profit. QI Capacity.  s ability to operate Another factor that can impact your collaborative’ QI is the capacity of local sites (hospitals, etc.) to participate in QI projects. “ ” refers to local expertise in conducting QI. Staff fro m existing PQCs note capacity s likely that a collaborative that QI expertise varies from hospital to hospital, and it’ will encounter sites that have never done systematic QI work before. If you can invest in growing QI capacity within your state, this knowledge base can support the sustainability of your collaborative by making it easier to build support for and launch future initiatives. Supports for Sustainability 6.2 Throughout the life of your collaborative, you will probably carry out activities that can sup port you in your future efforts if you conduct them strategically and keep sustainability in mind. These activities include:  Engaging Participants, Patients, and F amily M embers. To sustain your collaborative, it’ s important to build a base of engaged part icipants by conducting initiatives that are important for your state, supporting and recognizing participant successes, and providing opportunities for collaborative learning. These participants, who understand the benefits of a PQC and who have seen the positive impact of your work, can support sustainability by creating a demand for what you do. Additionally, patients and family members may be able to advocate for policy or financial support at the legislative level in ways that other PQC staff olders cannot. They can also serve as powerful advocates by writing and stakeh letters of support to accompany grant applications and other funding requests.  Developing Key Partnerships. It’s important to develop partnerships with key organizations that have a stake in perinatal care quality. These organizations – such as March of Dimes, payers, state health departments, etc. – might be involved in steering the direction and priorities of the collaborative. Creating ties with relevant stakeholder and family organizations, and aligning your initiatives with their priorities, can support your sustainability. Stakeholders may be sources of funding or other resources, can help spread the word about your work, and can help your collaborative remain relevant to a variety of potential constituencies.  Building on Successful Initiatives. Your collaborative’ s successful initiatives, beyond making an impact on perinatal care quality, can also help demonstrate the value of your work and attract future participants. It may be possible to use 54

56 data collected during your initiatives to examine their broader positive impact. For example , you could conduct economic analyses to show interested audiences (such as payers) the money saved through your QI efforts. Seeing the broader impact of your work may also attract new hospitals to participate in your future initiatives by demonstrating that these QI projects can succeed and positively impact the quality of care. Dissemination and M arketing to K  Audiences. Chapter 5 of this document ey provided a thorough discussion related to dissemination and dissemination s important to note, planning, so that will not be discussed in detail here. It’ however, that dissemination – particularly when targeted to those audiences who is one of the most critical can support your collaborative in the future – components of sustainability. 6.3 Sustainability Case Studies In Chapter 1, we provided examples of four collaboratives that launched with different funding levels – minimal , limited, moderate, and substantial. Here, we revisit those same PQCs to show how they are continuing to fund the work they started.  Minimal Funding (under $10,000) – Neonatal Quality Improvement Collaborative of Massachusetts (NeoQIC)/Massachusetts Perinatal Quality Collaborative (MPQC). After first developing a foundation of collaboration between the level III NICUs in the state that were the initial NeoQIC members, NeoQIC gradually developed partnerships with other state agencies, including the Mas sachusetts Department of Public Health, the Massachusetts Hospital Association, and the March of Dimes of Massachusetts. Through a forum provided by the Vermont Oxford Network, NeoQIC also developed partnerships with other state collaboratives, including g roups from California, North Carolina, Ohio, Tennessee, New Jersey, Michigan, Illinois, and others. These partnerships and the success of early NeoQIC projects soon led to opportunities for additional funding. In 2011, NeoQIC joined a two -year multi -state project focused on NICU central line -associated infections led by the North Carolina collaborative. This project included funding from the state hospital association which, for the first time for NeoQIC, provided some financial support to participating NIC Us. In 2012, the March of Dimes of Massachusetts joined with NeoQIC in organizing and supporting the first New England Neonatology Quality and Safety Forum. This annual conference, focused on QI education and sharing of local QI initiatives, continues with March of Dimes support to this day. In 2012, the Massachusetts Department of Health agreed to support a new NeoQIC initiative focused on Neonatal Abstinence Syndrome. This was the first NeoQIC project that was open to level I and level II centers in addit ion to level III NICUs, and over 40 hospitals in the state joined. Funding for this project from the state continues as well. In 2011, 55

57 as NeoQIC continued to grow, several groups came together to form the MPQC, including the Department of Public Health, the March of Dimes, the Massachusetts chapter of the American Congress of Obstetrics and Gynecology, and key obstetric leaders from across the state. The MPQC initially functioned primarily through two large statewide summits; funding and administrative supp ort was provided by the March of Dimes. In 2014, Massachusetts was successful in obtaining CDC funding for state perinatal quality collaboratives. The Massachusetts PQC is a partnership of NeoQIC, MPQC, Department of Public Health, and March of Dimes. Limited Funding ($10,000-  – Florida Perinatal Quality $100,000) The FPQC is approaching sustainability because of Collaborative (FPQC). strengthening working partnerships and successful completion of a series of s and activities. initiative hey are: 1) evolving into a more In this new phase, t formal organizational structure with the steering committee and other operational committees; 2) providing a core set of activities , including quality initiatives, an annual conference, quality training workshops, a hospita l QI data indicator system, and periodic newsletters and website services; and 3) developing leaders, volunteers, and staff. The continual pursuit of funding has been essential. Most funding is provided through grants and contracts to provide specific stat ewide services, including support from the state Title V agency and the March of Dimes, as well as others, such as federal grants, foundations, and health plans.  $499,999) – Illinois Perinatal Quality Moderate Funding ($100,000- As ILPQC moves forward and continues to implement Collaborative (ILPQC). new initiatives, the collaborative is also focusing on building relationships with key stakeholders and identifying new sources of funding in order to sustain its ’s Health Insurance Program Reauthorization Act funding work. The initial Children that they used to develop their collaborative ended in late 2015, and although they successfully applied for a CDC grant aimed at supporting PQCs for three years, they recognize the need to find additional short- term fundi ng to supplement the CDC grant, as well as long -term partners to support and fund the collaborative ’s work going forward. In order to identify potential sustainable funding sources, ILPQC staff conducted a telephone survey with existing collaboratives to learn how they were funded. With the information they received, they began conducting targeted outreach to the types of organizations that provided funding to other PQCs, such as state agencies, insurance companies, and foundations with similar missions. IL PQC staff also conduct ongoing searches for new grants and other funding opportunities. All of these efforts to build new relationships and secure new funding sources have been bolstered by the fact that the collaborative has data to show that its initiati ves have made a positive impact. 56

58  California Perinatal Quality Care Substantial Funding ($500,000+) – CPQCC is funded primarily through dues from member Collaborative (CPQCC). hospitals. They were able to achieve stability in this funding source when ’s Services (a state- run program that provides healthcare to California Children children up to age 21) mandated that the hospitals they approve join CPQCC. The ’s Services and CPQCC was facilitated by relationship between California Children the outcomes data that CPQCC provided. This data was quite valuable to California Children ’s Services because it helped to show the impact of their healthcare expenditures. CPQCC also hired a business consultant to specifically help them address sustainability issues. This consultant helped them to develop strategies for continuing to fund their work, as well as identifying new stakeholders to approach (such as health insurers) who may be able to provide funding in the future. 6.4 Resources Other PQCs are the best resource to learn more about how collaboratives sustain their efforts over time. You can find contact information for other PQCs on CDC ’s website: http://www.cdc.gov/reproductivehealth/MaternalInfantHealth/PQC -States.html This includes a 2013 webinar on Building and Sustaining a Collaborative: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IEKMNzCB1Hk 57

Related documents

Implementation Handbook For The Convention On The Rights Of The Child

Implementation Handbook For The Convention On The Rights Of The Child

IMPLEMENTATION HANDBOOK FOR THE CONVENTION ON THE RIGHTS OF THE CHILD FULLY REVISED THIRD EDITION IMPLEMENTATION HANDBOOK IMPLEMENTATION HANDBOOK FOR THE CONVENTION ON THE FOR THE CONVENTION ON THE RI...

More info »
WEF GlobalInformationTechnology Report 2014

WEF GlobalInformationTechnology Report 2014

Insight Report The Global Information Technology Report 2014 Rewards and Risks of Big Data Beñat Bilbao-Osorio, Soumitra Dutta, and Bruno Lanvin, Editors

More info »
Best Practices For Legal Education

Best Practices For Legal Education

Best Practices for Legal Education A Vision and A Road Map Roy Stuckey and Others Foreword by Robert MacCrate, Esq.

More info »
Building Excellent Schools Today (BEST) Annual Report

Building Excellent Schools Today (BEST) Annual Report

Building Excellent Schools Today (BEST) Annual Report Submitted to: Senate Education Committee Senate Finance Committee House Education Committee House Finance Committee Capital Development Committee ...

More info »
AndersBehringBreivikManifesto

AndersBehringBreivikManifesto

2011 , London – By Andrew Berwick

More info »
Best Available Techniques for Preventing and Controlling Industrial Pollution

Best Available Techniques for Preventing and Controlling Industrial Pollution

Best Av AilABle techniques for Preventing And controlling industriAl Pollution Activity 2: Approaches to establishing Best Available t echniques (BA t) Around the World

More info »
Speech Language Services in Arizona Schools: Guidelines for Best Practice

Speech Language Services in Arizona Schools: Guidelines for Best Practice

Arizona Department of Education , Superintendent of Public Instruction Kathy Hoffman Exceptional S tudent S ervices Arizona Technical Assistance System (AZ -TAS) Speech -Language Services i n A rizona...

More info »
Little Women

Little Women

Little Women By Louisa May Alcott

More info »
Microsoft Word   A) Division 245.docx

Microsoft Word A) Division 245.docx

tables Attachment Division 245, including A: Nov. 15-16, 2018, EQC meeting 1 of 121 Page Division 245 CLEANER AIR OREGON 340-245-0005 Purpose and Overview (1) This statement of purpose and overview is...

More info »
WEF GGGR 2017

WEF GGGR 2017

Insight Report The Global Gender Gap Report 2 017

More info »
Microsoft Word   guidelinesforbestpractice2001.doc

Microsoft Word guidelinesforbestpractice2001.doc

Guidelines for Best Practice in Child and Adolescent Mental Health Services Pennsylvania Department of Public Welfare Office of Mental Health and Substance Abuse Services Bureau of Children’s Behavior...

More info »
Numerical Recipes

Numerical Recipes

Sample page from NUMERICAL RECIPES IN C: THE ART OF SCIENTIFIC COMPUTING (ISBN 0-521-43108-5) Permission is granted for internet users to make one paper copy for their own personal use. Further reprod...

More info »
republic

republic

The Republic By Plato http://www.idph.net 18 de maio de 2002

More info »
WaterSense at Work: Best Management Practices for Commercial and Institutional Facilities

WaterSense at Work: Best Management Practices for Commercial and Institutional Facilities

WaterSense at Work Best Management Practices for Commercial and Institutional Facilities

More info »
The Best of Charlie Munger 1994 2011

The Best of Charlie Munger 1994 2011

The Best of Charlie Munger: 1994-2011 A collection of speeches, essays, and Wesco annual meeting notes

More info »
networks-book

networks-book

Networks, Crowds, and Markets: Reasoning about a Highly Connected World David Easley Jon Kleinberg Dept. of Economics Dept. of Computer Science Cornell University Cornell University Cambridge Universi...

More info »
meinkampf

meinkampf

Mein Kampf Adolf Hitler Translated into English by James Murphy

More info »
Computer Vision: Algorithms and Applications

Computer Vision: Algorithms and Applications

Computer Vision: Algorithms and Applications Richard Szeliski September 3, 2010 draft c © 2010 Springer This electronic draft is for non-commercial personal use only, and may not be posted or re-distr...

More info »
Essentials

Essentials

Essentials of Metaheuristics A Set of Undergraduate Lecture Notes by Sean Luke Department of Computer Science George Mason University Second Edition Online Version 2.2 October, 2015 The Mona Lisa, est...

More info »