Impact of visualising healthcare quality performance: a systematic review

Abstract

Objective Performance visualisation tools are increasingly being applied in healthcare to enhance decision-making and improve quality of care. However, there is a lack of comprehensive synthesis of their overall effectiveness and the contextual factors that influence their success in different clinical settings. This study aims to provide a broad synthesis of visualisation interventions not limited to a specific department.Design Systematic review.Data sources MEDLINE and Embase were searched until December 2022.Eligibility criteria Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies in English involving a visualisation intervention, either alone or as a core intervention, that reported quantitative outcomes including process and outcome indicators.Data extraction and synthesis Data on study characteristics, intervention characteristics, outcome measures and results were extracted. The quality of evidence was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach, and risk of bias was evaluated with Risk of Bias 2 for RCTs and Risk of Bias in Non-randomised Studies - of Interventions for non-randomised studies.Results Of the 12 studies included, 2 were RCTs and 10 were observational studies, including 1 before-after study and 1 interrupted time series study. Five studies (42%) were conducted in teaching hospital settings. Compared with the control group or baseline, 10 studies reported a statistically significant change in at least one of their outcome measures. A majority of the studies reported a positive impact, including prescription adherence (6/10), screening tests (3/10) and monitoring (3/10). Visualisation tool factors like type, clinical setting, workflow integration and clinician engagement, may have some influence on the effectiveness of the intervention, but no reliable evidence was identified.Conclusion Performance visualisation tools have the potential to improve clinical performance indicators. More studies with standardised outcome measures and integrating qualitative methods are needed to understand the contextual factors that influence the effectiveness of these interventions.