Materials and methods: A systematic literature survey was adopted in this paper, involving the review of 25 relevant researched articles found in the databases Science Direct, EBSCO, MEDLINE, CINAHL and PubMed.
Result: The systematic literature survey reveals five variables to be core predictors of TQM, signifying how important these variables are in the successful implementation of TQM in the health-care context. Also, it is revealed that the identified core predictors have positive effects on an improved health-care system. However, the systematic survey of the literature reveals a dearth of studies on TQM in the health-care context.
Conclusion: As TQM has become an important management approach for advancing effectiveness in the health-care sector, this kind of research is of value to researchers and managers. Stakeholders in the health sectors should introduce and implement TQM in hospitals and clinics. Nevertheless, this study has limitations, including that the databases and search engines adopted for the literature search are not exhaustive.
Objective: This study assessed feasibility of using quality improvement (QI) tools to improve management of perioperative pain in hospitals in multiple developing countries.
Methods: The International Pain Registry and Developing Countries working groups, from the International Association for the Study of Pain (IASP), sponsored the project and PAIN OUT, a QI and research network, coordinated it, and provided the research tools. The IASP published a call about the project on its website. Principal investigators (PIs) were responsible for implementing a preintervention and postintervention study in 1 to 2 surgical wards in their hospitals, and they were free to choose the QI intervention. Trained surveyors used standardized and validated web-based tools for collecting findings about perioperative pain management and patient reported outcomes (PROs). Four processes and PROs, independent of surgery type, assessed effectiveness of the interventions.
Results: Forty-three providers responded to the call; 13 applications were selected; and PIs from 8 hospitals, in 14 wards, in 7 countries, completed the study. Interventions focused on teaching providers about pain management. Processes improved in 35% and PROs in 37.5% of wards.
Conclusions: The project proved useful on multiple levels. It offered PIs a framework and tools to perform QI work and findings to present to colleagues and administration. Management practices and PROs improved on some wards. Interpretation of change proved complex, site-dependent, and related to multiple factors. PAIN OUT gained experience coordinating a multicentre, international QI project. The IASP promoted research, education, and QI work.
Study design: Qualitative.
Place and duration of study: The study was conducted with 32 key informants at the family physician program at the Tabriz University of Medical Sciences between May 2018 and June 2018. Method: This is a qualitative study. A purposeful sampling method was used with only one inclusion criterion for participants: five years of experience in the family physician program. The researchers conducted 17 individual and group non-structured interviews and examined participants' perspectives on the challenges faced in the implementation of the pay-for-performance system in the family physician program. Content analysis was conducted on the obtained data.
Results: This study identified 7 themes, 14 sub-themes, and 46 items related to the challenges in the implementation of pay-for-performance systems in Iran's family physician program. The main themes are: workload, training, program cultivation, payment, assessment and monitoring, information management, and level of authority. Other sub-challenges were also identified.
Conclusion: The study results demonstrate some notable challenges faced in the implementation of the pay-for-performance system. This information can be helpful to managers and policymakers.