Delivering quality improvement in practice

Delivering quality improvement in practice
Assignment guidance LO1 & LO2
Learning Outcome 1
Critically evaluate health care practice and identify areas of practice that would benefit from quality enhancement innovation.
Learning Outcome 2
Define and justify a solution that is needed to deliver enhancement of the service and the safety and experience of patients who use that service
Assessment; – 6,000 word essay Weighting: – 50%
This assignment is a justification for why your quality improvement project is:
A. Necessary
B. Considered effective in terms of the solution that you are proposing
C. Tangible and clearly defined with stake holder buy in
D. Diligently planned
Introduction (approx. 500 words)
Your introduction is a broad summary to set the context and justify why your DQIP is necessary, and why you need to undertake a literature review to appraise the evidence on your chosen topic. Within this you will need to refer to current clinical evidence such as NICE guidelines and policy recommendations to provide a general introduction of the main elements of your topic. This will also identify what aspects you plan to focus on in your literature review.
1. Critically evaluate health care practice and Identify areas of practice that would benefit from quality enhancement innovation (approx. 3500 words)
This section is a structured literature review. You will need to demonstrate a clear search strategy using a systematic, structured approach that you will apply across several databases. The following elements must be included:
• You should have a clear question for your literature review that includes elements of the PICO framework: the problem/ participants (P), the intervention (I), and outcomes (O).
• You need to define your inclusion/exclusion criteria, covering the study design, specific aspects of your sample & setting, specific treatments/interventions, and specific outcomes that you want to focus on. This can be presented in table and will be used to inform / direct your data extraction from the literature search
• Identify your search terms, breaking this down into keywords and Medical Subject headings (MeSH). Consider the use of truncations (* and $) and Boolean operators (AND/OR) within your search strategy.
• Consider how you will present the data from your search across the databases (number of hits per database, hand searching etc). For each database you need to identify the total number of hits, how many abstracts screened/included; how many full articles screened/included; and how many papers you included in your literature review. You also need to show how many duplicates were removed at each stage. You can present this data in tables and/or use the PRISMA flow chart to illustrate.
• The number of included articles should range from 10-25. Less than this number may be insufficient for an in-depth literature review; more than 25 will result in information overload. Both can be challenging so consider revising your search strategy.
• Data extracted from each article should be critically and systematically analysed and presented in a summary table. This must include the following: author/year/country, sample & setting, aims, methods/study design, main findings. You can add a column for quality appraisal/limitations, or you can discuss this in the text if you prefer.
• Thematic analysis from your summary tables can be a narrative synthesis to discuss the main themes from the findings of your literature review. This will enable you to group the main findings into meaningful sections that will form the foundation for your DQIP. This should be presented in a logical order, presenting what is known and unknown on each aspect to identify any gaps.
• Following this thematic analysis you should provide a concise summary of the key points and identify the gaps that you intend to address within your DQIP

2. Define and justify a solution that is needed to deliver enhancement of the service and the safety and experience of patients who use that service (1500 words)
This section will follow your plans to implement your DQIP, addressing the gaps identified in the above literature review. This will form the justification for your DQIP and will follow a logical flow.
• You need to provide a detailed implementation plan with timescales, and SMART measurable outcomes. (You can provide a Gantt chart/tabled project plan in the appendices).
• You will need to expand on planning elements, such as stakeholder analysis, PEST(LE) models, PDSA, and forcefield analysis (put examples/forms in the appendix). This should include a number of different viewpoints to critically discuss different aspects of planning a quality improvement project to ensure success. You need to provide a clear rationale with a robust evidence base to justify why you have chosen this innovative approach.
• You need to discuss risk assessment strategies and ethical implications for patients, staff and clinical services (add your RE1/permission letter in the appendix).
• You need to include aspects of change management to demonstrate your understanding of driving change and implementing a quality improvement project in your practice area. Within this you need to discuss the implications for safety and quality assurance.

Conclusion (approx. 500 words)
Provide a short, succinct overview of your project and proposed solution. There should be no new information within a conclusion as it is just a summary of the above.
References
Minimum Secondary Research Source Requirements:
Level HE7 – It is expected that the Reference List will contain between twenty to twenty five sources. As a MINIMUM the Reference List should include four refereed academic journals and five academic books.

Appendice

.
Assessments:

Assessment Title: Evaluation and justification of Project

Assessment Length: 6000 words

Learning Outcomes:

LO1: Critically evaluate health care practice and identify areas of practice that would benefit from quality enhancement innovation.
LO2: Define and justify a solution that is needed to deliver enhancement of the service and the safety and experience of patients who use that service

Assignment Brief:
This first submission is a justification for why the quality improvement project that you wish to undertake is
A. Necessary
B. Considered effective in terms of the solution that you are proposing
C. Tangible and clearly defined with stake holder buy in
D. Diligently planned with a structured literature review
This first piece of work is critical to the success of the project, as it is the work that you put in here which will significantly determine the success of your project. Remember to write extremely concisely. Make every word count.

Specific Assessment Criteria:
(Please note that the General Assessment Criteria will also apply. Please see section 15)
Distinction (70% and above):
Presents an exceptional critique of key research material resulting in clear, original and illuminating conclusions
Demonstrates an exceptional knowledge of theory and practice for this level.
Expertly addresses the assumptions of the title and/or the requirements of the brief.
Merit (60-69%):
Presents a cohesive critique of key research material resulting in clear and original conclusions.
Comprehensively interprets appropriate concepts and theoretical models.
Addresses the assumptions of the title and/or the requirements of the brief well.
Pass (50-59%):
Generally addresses the assumptions of the title and/or the requirements of the brief.
Satisfactorily interprets some appropriate concepts and theoretical models.
Presents some critique of key research material resulting in original
Fail (0-49%)