Customize your JAMA Network experience by selecting one or more topics from the list below.
Identify all potential conflicts of interest that might be relevant to your comment.
Conflicts of interest comprise financial interests, activities, and relationships within the past 3 years including but not limited to employment, affiliation, grants or funding, consultancies, honoraria or payment, speaker's bureaus, stock ownership or options, expert testimony, royalties, donation of medical equipment, or patents planned, pending, or issued.
Err on the side of full disclosure.
If you have no conflicts of interest, check "No potential conflicts of interest" in the box below. The information will be posted with your response.
Not all submitted comments are published. Please see our commenting policy for details.
Wandling MW, Minami CA, Johnson JK, et al. Development of a Conceptual Model for Surgical Quality Improvement Collaboratives: Facilitating the Implementation and Evaluation of Collaborative Quality Improvement. JAMA Surg. 2016;151(12):1181–1183. doi:https://doi.org/10.1001/jamasurg.2016.2817
Participation in quality improvement (QI) collaboratives has helped hospitals improve outcomes and decrease costs.1,2 As such, state-level surgical QI collaboratives have become increasingly common. However, the optimal design of an effective collaborative and its key drivers of success remain unclear. Our objective was to create a conceptual model of a surgical QI collaborative to facilitate the development, implementation, and systematic evaluation of the Illinois Surgical Quality Improvement Collaborative (ISQIC).
A multidisciplinary, multi-institutional team of ISQIC researchers conducted a literature review and expanded and adapted key components of existing models of health care QI to create a conceptual model for a surgical QI collaborative.3,4 Feedback from QI leaders, hospital administrators, clinical frontline staff, and quality researchers guided the evolution of the model through multiple iterations until final consensus was reached. Institutional review board approval was not required, as this research did not involve human participants.
Create a personal account or sign in to: