Understanding Staff Perspectives on Collaborative Quality Improvement in the ICU: A Qualitative Exploration

Despite the ongoing initiatives of quality improvement collaboratives in healthcare which reflect various multifaceted intervention packages, clear evidence of the effectiveness of the model itself is lacking. Little is known about the true impact of the collaborative approach on improvement outcomes or how specific components are actually implemented within participating organizations. This dissertation reports on empirical qualitative research undertaken to investigate “how” healthcare providers and management describe the experience of being involved in a collaborative network for quality improvement. Using a process evaluation of a sample QI collaborative, this research reveals that frontline staff do not feel the need to conform or be identical to their peer organizations; rather they feel that by participating with them that their high level of care is finally recognized. In addition, the existing communication structure is ineffective for staff engagement and a “QI bubble” seems to exist in terms of knowledge transfer and the idea of collaboration bears out more internally in increased intra-team cooperation than externally between organizations or units. Selected theoretical perspectives from the fields of sociology and organizational behaviour are used as an analytic framework from which the author posits that based on the findings from this case study that in fact collaboratives may not actually function by any of the commonly held assumptions of legitimization, communication and collaboration. A conceptual framework for how these constructs are related in terms of QI collaborative design is proposed for future testing. With further work and on-the-ground testing of this model and relational hypotheses, this research can help the QI community develop a more functional theory of collaborative improvement and use mixed methods evaluation to better understand complex QI implementation.Ph