Abstract
Introduction: Clinical indicators are used to measure and quantify the safety and quality of patient care. They are also often used as endpoints in clinical trials. Definitions of clinical indicators in common use are extremely heterogeneous, limiting their applicability. As part of the international Standardised Endpoints in Perioperative Medicine initiative, this study will identify clinical indicators by systematically reviewing the anaesthesia and perioperative medicine literature, and will provide consensus, clinically useful definitions for those indicators using a Delphi process. Methods and analysis: An electronic database search will be conducted of Medline (PubMed/OVID), EMBASE and the Cochrane Library in order to meet this review's objectives that are: (1) To identify clinical indicators and their definitions used in randomised controlled trials that assess patient-related quality and safety interventions in perioperative medicine; (2) To select a shortlist of recommended indicators and definitions that are the most suitable for evaluation of quality and safety interventions following an expert-based consensus-gaining process (Delphi method) and (3) To provide a classification scale for each indicator related to its clarity of definition, validity (strength), reliability, feasibility (ease of use) and frequency of use. This systematic review protocol is reported in accordance with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Protocols guidance. Ethics and dissemination: Ethical approval is not required for this systematic review and Delphi process. The results of this study will be disseminated to the anaesthesia and perioperative medicine clinical and academic community through national and international presentations and through publication in a peer reviewed journal.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Article number | e023427 |
| Number of pages | 8 |
| Journal | BMJ Open |
| Volume | 8 |
| Issue number | 11 |
| DOIs | |
| Publication status | Published - 1 Nov 2018 |
Keywords
- clinical indicators
- outcomes: outcome measures
- perioperative medicine
Cite this
}
Clinical indicators for reporting the effectiveness of patient quality and safety-related interventions : A protocol of a systematic review and Delphi consensus process as part of the international Standardised Endpoints for Perioperative Medicine initiative (StEP). / Bampoe, Sohail; Cook, Tim; Fleisher, Lee; Grocott, Michael P.W.; Neuman, Mark; Story, David; Myles, Paul; Haller, Guy.
In: BMJ Open, Vol. 8, No. 11, e023427, 01.11.2018.Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › Other › peer-review
TY - JOUR
T1 - Clinical indicators for reporting the effectiveness of patient quality and safety-related interventions
T2 - A protocol of a systematic review and Delphi consensus process as part of the international Standardised Endpoints for Perioperative Medicine initiative (StEP)
AU - Bampoe, Sohail
AU - Cook, Tim
AU - Fleisher, Lee
AU - Grocott, Michael P.W.
AU - Neuman, Mark
AU - Story, David
AU - Myles, Paul
AU - Haller, Guy
PY - 2018/11/1
Y1 - 2018/11/1
N2 - Introduction: Clinical indicators are used to measure and quantify the safety and quality of patient care. They are also often used as endpoints in clinical trials. Definitions of clinical indicators in common use are extremely heterogeneous, limiting their applicability. As part of the international Standardised Endpoints in Perioperative Medicine initiative, this study will identify clinical indicators by systematically reviewing the anaesthesia and perioperative medicine literature, and will provide consensus, clinically useful definitions for those indicators using a Delphi process. Methods and analysis: An electronic database search will be conducted of Medline (PubMed/OVID), EMBASE and the Cochrane Library in order to meet this review's objectives that are: (1) To identify clinical indicators and their definitions used in randomised controlled trials that assess patient-related quality and safety interventions in perioperative medicine; (2) To select a shortlist of recommended indicators and definitions that are the most suitable for evaluation of quality and safety interventions following an expert-based consensus-gaining process (Delphi method) and (3) To provide a classification scale for each indicator related to its clarity of definition, validity (strength), reliability, feasibility (ease of use) and frequency of use. This systematic review protocol is reported in accordance with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Protocols guidance. Ethics and dissemination: Ethical approval is not required for this systematic review and Delphi process. The results of this study will be disseminated to the anaesthesia and perioperative medicine clinical and academic community through national and international presentations and through publication in a peer reviewed journal.
AB - Introduction: Clinical indicators are used to measure and quantify the safety and quality of patient care. They are also often used as endpoints in clinical trials. Definitions of clinical indicators in common use are extremely heterogeneous, limiting their applicability. As part of the international Standardised Endpoints in Perioperative Medicine initiative, this study will identify clinical indicators by systematically reviewing the anaesthesia and perioperative medicine literature, and will provide consensus, clinically useful definitions for those indicators using a Delphi process. Methods and analysis: An electronic database search will be conducted of Medline (PubMed/OVID), EMBASE and the Cochrane Library in order to meet this review's objectives that are: (1) To identify clinical indicators and their definitions used in randomised controlled trials that assess patient-related quality and safety interventions in perioperative medicine; (2) To select a shortlist of recommended indicators and definitions that are the most suitable for evaluation of quality and safety interventions following an expert-based consensus-gaining process (Delphi method) and (3) To provide a classification scale for each indicator related to its clarity of definition, validity (strength), reliability, feasibility (ease of use) and frequency of use. This systematic review protocol is reported in accordance with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Protocols guidance. Ethics and dissemination: Ethical approval is not required for this systematic review and Delphi process. The results of this study will be disseminated to the anaesthesia and perioperative medicine clinical and academic community through national and international presentations and through publication in a peer reviewed journal.
KW - clinical indicators
KW - outcomes: outcome measures
KW - perioperative medicine
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85057726147&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1136/bmjopen-2018-023427
DO - 10.1136/bmjopen-2018-023427
M3 - Article
VL - 8
JO - BMJ Open
JF - BMJ Open
SN - 2044-6055
IS - 11
M1 - e023427
ER -