Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Quality assurance methodology and applications to abdominal imaging PQI

  • Published:
Abdominal Radiology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Quality assurance has increasingly become an integral part of medicine, with tandem goals of increasing patient safety and procedural quality, improving efficiency, lowering cost, and ultimately improving patient outcomes. This article reviews quality assurance methodology, ranging from the PDSA cycle to the application of lean techniques, aimed at operational efficiency, to continually evaluate and revise the health care environment. Alignment of goals for practices, hospitals, and healthcare organizations is critical, requiring clear objectives, adequate resources, and transparent reporting. In addition, there is a significant role played by regulatory bodies and oversight organizations in determining external benchmarks of quality, practice, and individual certification and reimbursement. Finally, practical application of quality principles to practice improvement projects in abdominal imaging will be presented.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Institute of Medicine. To err is human: building a safer system. http://www.IHI.org. Published November 1999. Accessed February 22, 2015

  2. Institute of Medicine. Crossing the quality chasm: a new health system for the 21st century. www.IHI.org. Published March 2001. Accessed February 22, 2015

  3. A primer on defining the triple aim. The Institute for Healthcare Improvement, 2014. http://www.ihi.org. Accessed August 11, 2015

  4. Cromwell J, Trisolini MG, Pope GE, Mitchell J, Greenwald LM (2011) Pay for performance in health care: methods and approaches. Research Triangle Park, NC: RTI

    Book  Google Scholar 

  5. Henkel RJ, Maryland PA (2015) The risks and rewards of value-based reimbursement. Front Health Serv Manag Winter 32:3–16

    Google Scholar 

  6. Burstin H, Leatherman S, Goldmann D (2016) The evolution of healthcare quality measurement in the United States. J Intern Med 279(2):154–159. doi:10.1111/joim.12471

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS).Physician quality reporting system (PQRS). http://www.cms.gov/Medicare/Quality-Initiatives-Patient-Assessment-Instruments/PQRS/index.html?redirect=/PQRS/. Published April 2014. Accessed February 22, 2015

  8. American Board of Radiology. Maintenance of Certification Part 4: http://www.theabr.org/moc-dr-comp4. Accessed December 4, 2015

  9. Bruno J, Nagy P (2014) Fundamentals of quality and safety in diagnostic radiology. Am Coll Radiol 11:1115–1120. doi:10.1016/j.jacr.2014.08.028

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Kruskal JB, Eisenberg R, Sosna J, et al. (2011) Quality improvement in radiology: basic principles and tools required to achieve success. RadioGraphics 31:1499–1509. doi:10.1148/rg.316115501

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Deming WE (2000) For The New Economics Industry, Government, and Education. Cambridge, MA: MIT

    Google Scholar 

  12. Tsutstui W, Edwards W (1996) Deming and the origins of quality control in Japan. J Jpn Stud 22:295–325

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. The breakthrough series: IHI’s collaborative model for achieving breakthrough improvement. IHI Innovation Series white paper. Boston: Institute for Healthcare Improvement; 2003. www.IHI.org

  14. Keller PA (2009) Six sigma demystified. McGraw-Hill professional, 2nd edn. New York: McGraw-Hill

    Google Scholar 

  15. Pyzdek T, Keller PA (2009) The six sigma handbook. New York: McGraw-Hill

    Google Scholar 

  16. Found P, Harrison R (2012) Understanding the lean voice of the customer. Int J Lean Six Sigma 3:251–267

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Toyota Motor Corporation. Toyota production system. www.toyota-global.com/company/vision_philosophy/toyota_production_system/. Accessed November 14, 2013

  18. Lee E, Grooms R, Mamidala S, Nagy P (2014) Six easy steps on how to create a lean sigma value stream map for a multidisciplinary clinical operation. J Am Coll Radiol 11:1144–1149

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Young TP, McClean SI (2008) A critical look at lean thinking in healthcare. Quality Saf Health Care 17(5):382–386

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Vallejo B (2009) Tools of the trade: lean and Six Sigma. J Healthc Qual 31:3–4

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Graban M (2012) Lean hospitals: improving quality, patient safety, and employee engagement. Boca Raton, FL: CRC

    Google Scholar 

  22. Knechtges P, Decker MC (2014) Application of Kaizen methodology to Foster departmental engagement in quality improvement. J Am Coll Radiol 11:1126–1130

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Rubin DL (2011) Informatics in radiology: measuring and improving quality in radiology: meeting the challenge with informatics. RadioGraphics 31(6):1511–1527

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Morgan MB, Meenan CD, Nabile M, Nagy P, Flanders AE (2014) Informatics leaders in radiology: who they are and why you need them? J Am Coll Radiol 11:1241–1250

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Cook TS, Nagy P (2014) Business intelligence for the radiologist: making you. J Am Coll Radiol 11:1238–1240

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Thrall JH (2013) Data mining, knowledge creation, and work process enhancement in the second generation of radiology’s digital age. J Am Coll Radiol 10:161–162

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Boland GW, Thrall JH, Duszak R Jr (2015) Business intelligence, data mining, and future trends. J Am Coll Radiol 12:9–11

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Mansoori B, Novak RD, Sivit CJ, Ros PR (2013) Utilization of Dashboard technology in academic radiology departments: results of a national survey. J Am Coll Radiol 10:283–288

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Kelly AM, Cronin P (2015) Practical approaches to quality improvement for radiologists. RadioGraphics 35:1630–1642

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Bruno J Advanced (2014) Practice quality improvement: beyond the radiology department. Am Coll Radiol 11:1150–1154

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. You-Ling Shyu J, Burleson J, Tallant C, Seidenwurm DJ, Rybicki FJ (2014) Performance measures in radiology. J Am Coll Radiol 11:456–463

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Rosenkrantz J, Lawson K, Ally R, et al. (2015) Focused process improvement events: sustainability of impact on process and performance in an academic radiology department. J Am Coll Radiol 12:75–81

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Masselli G, Gualdi G (2013) CT and MR enterography in evaluating small bowel diseases: when to use which modality? Abdom Imaging 38:249–259

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Cipriano LE, Levesque BG, Zaric GS, Loftus EV Jr, Sandborn WJ (2012) Cost-effectiveness of imaging strategies to reduce radiation-induced cancer risk in Crohn’s disease. Inflamm Bowel Dis 18:1240–1248

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Dambha F, Tanner J, Carroll N (2014) Diagnostic imaging in Crohn’s disease: what is the new gold standard? Best Pract Res Clin Gastroenterol 28:421–436

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Sinha R, Rawat S (2013) MRI enterography with divided dose oral preparation: effect on bowel distension and diagnostic quality. Indian J Radiol Imaging 23:86–91

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  37. Cima R, Kollengode A, Garnatz J, et al. (2007) Incidence and characteristics of potential and actual retained foreign object events in surgical patients. J Am Coll Surg 12:80–87

    Google Scholar 

  38. Hospital Acquired Conditions. Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, 2012. www.cms.gov/Medicare/Medicare-Fee-for-Service-Payment/HospitalAcqCond/. Accessed October 22, 2015

  39. Preventing unintended retained foreign objects. The Joint Commission Sentinel Event Alert 2013: 51

  40. Guidance for Performing Root Cause Analysis (RCA) with Performance Improvement Projects. QAPI. https://www.cms.gov/medicare/provider-enrollment-and-certification/qapi/downloads/guidanceforrca.pdf. Accessed November 12, 2015

  41. Anderson B, Fagerhaug T, Beltz M (2010) Root cause analysis and improvement in the healthcare sector. Milwaukee: ASO Quality

    Google Scholar 

  42. RCA2 Improving Root Cause Analyses and Actions to Prevent Harm, Version 2. 2016. The National Patient Safety Foundation. www.npsf.oreg. Accessed January 22, 2016

  43. Hospital Compare. Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. https://www.cms.gov/medicare/quality-initiatives-patient-assessment-instruments/hospitalqualityinits/hospitalcompare.html. Accessed September 13, 2015

  44. Physician Compare. Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. https://www.medicare.gov/physiciancompare. Accessed September 13, 2015

  45. Medical Imaging and Technology Alliance. Medical Imaging, 2015. http://www.medicalimaging.org/policy-and-positions/mita-smart-dose. Accessed December 12, 2015

  46. http://www.rsna.org/quality

  47. http://www.qualitymeasures.ahrq.gov/search/search.aspx?term=radiology

  48. http://www.qualityforum.org/Home.aspx

  49. http://www.acr.org/Quality-Safety

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Radiology, The University of Chicago, 5841 S. Maryland Ave., MC 2026, Chicago, IL, 60637, USA

    David M. Paushter & Stephen Thomas

Authors
  1. David M. Paushter
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Stephen Thomas
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to David M. Paushter.

Additional information

CME activity This article has been selected as the CME activity for the current month. Please visit https://ce.mayo.edu/node/15180 and follow the instructions to complete this CME activity.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Paushter, D.M., Thomas, S. Quality assurance methodology and applications to abdominal imaging PQI. Abdom Radiol 41, 395–404 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00261-016-0678-y

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00261-016-0678-y

Keywords

Search

Navigation