DEVELOPMENT OF A GOVERNMENT CONTINUOUS QUALITY IMPROVEMENT PROCEDURE FOR ASSESSING THE PROVISION OF BONE ANCHORED LIMB PROSTHESIS: A PROCESS RE-DESIGN DESCRIPTIVE STUDY
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND: Evidences of sustainable clinical benefits of bone-anchored prosthesis (BAP) using osseointegrated fixation over typical socket-suspended prostheses are becoming more probing. This influx of individuals to be fitted with BAP has pressed government organisations to adjust their policies. However, the appraisal of consumer’s experience for the provision of BAP founded by government organisation is yet to be developed. This descriptive study shares the experience gained by a government organisation, namely the Queensland Artificial Limb Service (QALS), while developing a specific BAP-inclusive continuous quality improvement (CQI) procedure. OBJECTIVE(S): The primary objective was to present the methods and outcomes of key steps required to plan and create this CQI procedure. The secondary objective was to highlight key barriers and facilitators of the transition from a socket-focused to the proposed BAP-inclusive CQI procedure. METHODOLOGY: The re-design process of the CQI procedure for 65 current QALS’s consumers with BAP involved a two-step process for the planning (e.g., case-mix, stakeholder) and creation (e.g., diagnosis, technical options, cost). FINDINGS: Prosthetists labour toward CQI procedure represented 1.3 hrs out of 22 hrs and AUD$213 out of AUD$3,300 or 6% of the whole procedure for the provision of BAP. The time spent by a prosthetist, consumer and QALS staff represented 24%, 24% and 53% of the time of the CQI procedure, respectively. The cost of prosthetist and QALS staff labour represented 70% and 30% of the CQI procedure, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: This descriptive study shares the workings and methodology that government organisations, such as QALS, can use to re-design a CQI procedure for comprehensive appraisal of the provision of prosthesis that could be inclusive of BAP and affordable while minimally time-consuming for prosthetists. The transition from a socket-focused to the proposed minimally disruptive BAP-inclusive CQI procedure was facilitated by prior knowledge of BAP treatment, early identification of the stakeholders and adaptation of current CQI procedure. Article PDF Link: https://jps.library.utoronto.ca/index.php/cpoj/article/view/31326/24425 LAYMAN’S ABSTRACT There is evidence supporting the long term clinical benefits of bone-anchored prosthesis (BAP) using an osseointegrated fixation over typical socket-suspended prostheses. The increasing number of individuals treated with osseointegrated fixation has pressed government organisations to adjust their policies for fair and equitable provision of prosthetic care. However, the appraisal of consumer’s experience for the provision of BAP by government organisation is yet to be developed. This descriptive study has fulfilled this need by sharing the experience gained by a QALS while developing a specific BAP-inclusive continuous quality improvement (CQI) procedure. This study revealed that government organisations can design a CQI procedure for comprehensive appraisal of the provision of prosthesis that could be inclusive of BAP and affordable while minimally time-consuming for prosthetists. The transition from a socket-focused to the proposed minimally disruptive BAP-inclusive CQI procedure was facilitated by prior knowledge of BAP treatment, early identification of the stakeholders and adaptation of current CQI procedure. How to Cite: Frossard L, Ferrada L, Quincey T, Burkett B, Berg D. Development of a government continuous quality improvement procedure for assessing the provision of bone anchored limb prosthesis: a process re-design descriptive study. Canadian Prosthetics & Orthotics Journal, Volume 1, Issue 2, No 4, 2018. DOI: https://doi.org/10.33137/cpoj.v1i2.31326
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,081 | 0,081 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,004 | 0,006 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,003 | 0,003 |
| Communication savante | 0,004 | 0,002 |
| Science ouverte | 0,002 | 0,004 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,005 | 0,001 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».