Thomas John Rose's activity
In group: Quality Management in Healthcare
-
Thomas John Rose posted an update in the group Quality Management in Healthcare 1 week, 5 days ago
Do you know the difference between the two types of Quality Improvement (QI) and the difference between Quality Improvement (QI) and Continuous Improvement (CI)? Please reply with a yes or no to each question.
Yes
Thanks. I’ll just wait a bit to see if any of the other 217 members if the SIG reply then I’ll respond.
To us, QI and CI are interchangeable so interesting to understand the difference. Not sure I was aware there were only two types of QI – although there are many different methods.
I have found that it is common to see these terms used interchangeably in the NHS. I have also found it helpful to differentiate them, as it is often assumed that if you are using QI then you are doing CI, but that isn’t usually the case. CI requires a systematic approach to using QI methods as part of normal operational management, alongside other processes to specify and monitor service quality. In my experience QI is often used as a stand alone (dare I say optional?) approach to making improvements but it isn’t always well integrated into the operational management system.
I’ll let the questions run a bit longer and then I’ll explain the differences. QI and CI are most certainly very different.
the difference between the two types of Quality Improvement (QI)? – NO – is there more than one?
the difference between Quality Improvement (QI) and Continuous Improvement (CI)? – in a way, QI is done just before every audit visit. CI is never finished.
Thanks for your relies so far. Only another 214 members to reply!
Great question – but not sure this is a yes/no question. In health there are so many projects on the go, with little control around methods and tools, with many clinicians taking on change projects without the support/expertise of project managers. Many tools may be useful in project planning and control, and common to QI, CI and service development. Projects labelled ‘QI’ sometimes lose out on the wider toolset – there is a risk that QI projects may lack completion, i.e. exit strategy, closedown and benefits realisation as changes settle into ‘business as usual’. Can you think of any QI projects that petered out and the gains are no longer evident? The old Juran trilogy slide encapsulates the topic well – whereby it suggest that in normal operation we have adequate measurement in place (our QMS complete with process maps and SOP’s) to know when a move to change the system (improve/redesign/transform) is due. I wonder if the ‘project office’ concept might reduce the expectation that clinicians are suddenly expert in change management (PM’s and change experts available on-loan). As a non-clinical change agent I spend most of my time supporting clinicians to formalise their planning and control approaches around the full range of change initiatives, and ensuring the unexciting stuff gets done (SOP’s, formal process mapping, ongoing measurement via governance structure etc.). I am not comfortable having my customers coming to a T junction and having to turn left for QI, right for Service development, straight on for Transformation and up the hill for CI.
I think it’s a No but great answer with loads of points to address later. Thanks.
No, but am very interested to understand the difference. My organisation is perhaps moving from QI to CI and a google search did not tell me much, but I found this Warwick Business School paper useful that *I think* tries to describe the differences (does this meet your definition?) https://warwick.ac.uk/fac/soc/wbs/research/vmi-nhs/roundtables/confidential_defining_and_demonstrating_value_from_continuous_improvement_in_the_nhs_v17-branded_f2_002.pdf.
I had no idea there were two types of QI!
I have a lot to say in reply to your great comment Nancy. I’ll wait to see if there are any more comments then reply to them all. Thanks.