Correction to: Improving care at scale: process evaluation of a multi-component quality improvement intervention to redu
- PDF / 1,002,817 Bytes
- 6 Pages / 595.276 x 790.866 pts Page_size
- 88 Downloads / 200 Views
CORRECTION
Open Access
Correction to: Improving care at scale: process evaluation of a multi-component quality improvement intervention to reduce mortality after emergency abdominal surgery (EPOCH trial) T. J. Stephens1*, C. J. Peden2, R. M. Pearse1, S. E. Shaw3, T. E. F. Abbott1, E. L. Jones4, D. Kocman5, G. Martin6 and on behalf of the EPOCH trial group Correction to: Implementation Science (2018) 13:142 https://doi.org/10.1186/s13012-018-0823-9 Following the publication of this article [1], the authors reported a number of errors which are given below. The published article contained a discrepancy in Table 3 between the PDF and HTML versions of the article. In the PDF version Table 3 was missing a row as shown below:
Table 3 Data collected for process evaluation Aspect of process evaluation
Data collection method
Data collected and data type
Delivery to the clusters
1. Collation of registers from QuIP meetings (30 meetings in total across 93 hospitals) 2. Collation of VLE usage logs
1. Free text responses regarding the positive and negative aspects of the programme 2. Observations and interviews with key staff in the 6 ethnographic sites
Delivery at the site level – QI intervention
1. Online exit questionnaire.
1. Whether a stakeholder meeting was held (QI strategy 1) 2. run-charts were used (QI strategy 4) 5. Whether the patient pathway was segmented (QI strategy 5) 6. Whether the PDSA approach was used (QI strategy 6)
Response of the sites / individuals
1. Online exit questionnaire. 2. Ethnographic data
1. Free text responses to 2 reflective questions: If you were to be involved in EPOCH again, a) ‘what would you continue doing’ and b) ‘what would you do differently’? 2. Observations and interviews with key staff in the 6 ethnographic sites
QuIP Quality Improvement Programme, VLE Virtual Learning Environment, NELA National Emergency Laparotomy Audit
* Correspondence: [email protected] 1 Critical Care and Perioperative Medicine Research Group, WHRI, c/o Adult Critical Care Unit, The Royal London Hospital, London E11BB, UK Full list of author information is available at the end of the article © The Author(s). 2018 Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
Stephens et al. Implementation Science
(2018) 13:148
Page 2 of 6
Table 3 should in fact contain four rows as in the HTML version: Table 3 Data collected for process evaluation Aspect of process evaluation
Data collection method
Data collected and data type
Delivery to the clusters
1. Collation of
Data Loading...
