Reinvigorating stagnant science: implementation laboratories and a meta-laboratory to efficiently advance the science of audit and feedback

BMJ Qual Saf. 2019 May;28(5):416-423. doi: 10.1136/bmjqs-2018-008355. Epub 2019 Mar 9.

Abstract

Audit and feedback (A&F) is a commonly used quality improvement (QI) approach. A Cochrane review indicates that A&F is generally effective and leads to modest improvements in professional practice but with considerable variation in the observed effects. While we have some understanding of factors that enhance the effects of A&F, further research needs to explore when A&F is most likely to be effective and how to optimise it. To do this, we need to move away from two-arm trials of A&F compared with control in favour of head-to-head trials of different ways of providing A&F. This paper describes implementation laboratories involving collaborations between healthcare organisations providing A&F at scale, and researchers, to embed head-to-head trials into routine QI programmes. This can improve effectiveness while producing generalisable knowledge about how to optimise A&F. We also describe an international meta-laboratory that aims to maximise cross-laboratory learning and facilitate coordination of A&F research.

Keywords: audit and feedback; implementation science; quality improvement; randomised controlled trial.

Publication types

  • Research Support, N.I.H., Extramural
  • Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

MeSH terms

  • Feedback*
  • Health Services Research
  • Humans
  • Medical Audit* / standards
  • Outcome Assessment, Health Care
  • Practice Patterns, Physicians' / standards*
  • Professional Practice / standards
  • Quality Improvement*
  • Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic