The aim of this study was to explore hospitals’ use of performance indicators for internal quality management activities.

The study conducted a qualitative interview among 72 health professionals and quality managers in 14 acute care hospitals in The Netherlands. The goal was to gain insight into data collection and use of performance indicators for two conditions: knee and hip replacement surgery and breast cancer surgery. Based on the data, themes were synthesized and the analyses were executed systematically by two analysts independently. Hospitals collect data for performance indicators and use it for quality management in different ways, while some do not seem to use the data for this purpose at all. Factors like ‘linking pin champions’, pro-active quality managers and engaged medical specialists seem to make a difference. A comprehensive hospital data infrastructure with electronic patient records and robust data collection software appears to be a prerequisite to produce reliable performance data for internal quality improvement.

Performance indicators are frequently used by hospitals as a tool to help internal quality control. It is advised that hospitals concentrate their human resource policies on “connecting pin champions,” the employment of experts and a proactive quality manager, and to make investments in a robust data infrastructure. Furthermore, it is challenging to compare the results of performance metrics among Dutch hospitals due to variations in data collection procedures. “Linking pin champions,” “active quality managers,” and “involved medical specialists” are factors that seem to matter. To provide trustworthy performance data for internal quality improvement, a comprehensive hospital data infrastructure with electronic patient records and dependable data gathering tools appears to be necessary. Hospitals typically utilise performance indicators as a tool to aid with internal quality control. Hospitals are recommended to focus their human resource policies on “connecting pin champions,” the hiring of professionals and a proactive quality manager, as well as to make investments in a strong data infrastructure. Furthermore, due to differences in data gathering methods, it is difficult to compare performance metrics findings amongst Dutch hospitals.

Author(s) Details:

Daan Botje,
Amphia Hospital, Langendijk 75, P.O. box 901574800 RA Breda, Netherlands and NIVEL, Netherlands Institute for Health Services Research, Utrecht, Netherlands.

Guus ten Asbroek,
Ahti, Amsterdam Health & Technology Institute, Amsterdam, Netherlands and   Department of Public Health, Academic Medical Center, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands.

Thomas Plochg,
Department of Public Health, Academic Medical Center, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands and  Netherlands Public Health Federation, Utrecht, Netherlands.

Helen Anema,
Department of Public Health, Academic Medical Center, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands.

Dionne S. Kringos,
Department of Public Health, Academic Medical Center, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands.

Claudia Fischer,
Philips Research, Cambridge, UK.

Cordula Wagner,
NIVEL, Netherlands Institute for Health Services Research, Utrecht, Netherlands and Philips Research, Cambridge, UK.

Niek S. Klazinga,
Department of Public Health, Academic Medical Center, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands.

Please see the link here: https://stm.bookpi.org/CODHR-V3/article/view/7901

Keywords: Performance indicators, quality management, hospitals, interview study