Poor reporting limits impact of research into improving surgical care

Posted by ap507 at May 12, 2016 09:39 AM |
Key details missing from research on improving quality of surgical care, review led by University of Leicester finds

Issued by University of Leicester Press Office on 12 May 2016

A new review of academic papers has found that the reporting of attempts to improve the quality of care before, during, and after surgery is “suboptimal”.

Researchers from the University of Leicester and Royal Brompton and Harefield NHS Foundation Trust found that, on average, the papers were missing 43% of the elements they should have been reporting. This could significantly reduce the usefulness of these papers, and their positive impact on patient care.

The study, published this month in The Joint Commission Journal on Quality and Patient Safety, reviewed 100 academic articles which described techniques to improve the quality and safety of surgical care. Funded by the Health Foundation and the Wellcome Trust, the review assessed each article against a checklist of items for accurate and complete reporting.

“We found that key information needed to understand what had done in the studies was often missing from articles,” said lead author Emma Jones of the University of Leicester. “The most frequently missing information concerned whether the intervention to improve quality was actually delivered as it was supposed to be. Next, researchers often did not report whether any modifications had been made to the intervention.”

Study authors emphasised the problems caused by incomplete or inaccurate reporting, including challenges for those seeking to replicate successful interventions to improve care.

Ms Jones added: “Quality improvement projects are typically designed and implemented to make actual changes to practice to improve patient care. Waste can occur if they’re not written up in a way that enables others to understand what they need to do to repeat any success. We are hoping our review will draw attention to the need for better reporting so that more patients can benefit from quality improvement.”

The paper ‘How Well Is Quality Improvement Described in the Perioperative Care Literature? A Systematic Review’ is available at: https://lra.le.ac.uk/handle/2381/37259

ENDS

Notes to editors:

For more information contact Emma Jones on elj20@le.ac.uk

The study assessed the papers using the TIDieR (Template for Intervention Description to enable Replication) checklist, which identifies components of interventions that studies should describe to ensure that they can be replicated by those reading the reports.

Paper reference:

Jones EL, Lees NJ, Martin G, Dixon-Woods M. How Well Is Quality Improvement Described In the Perioperative Literature? A Systematic Review. The Joint Commission Journal on Quality and Patient Safety 42 (5): May 196-206

 

 

 

Share this page: