Loading presentation...

Present Remotely

Send the link below via email or IM

Copy

Present to your audience

Start remote presentation

  • Invited audience members will follow you as you navigate and present
  • People invited to a presentation do not need a Prezi account
  • This link expires 10 minutes after you close the presentation
  • A maximum of 30 users can follow your presentation
  • Learn more about this feature in our knowledge base article

Do you really want to delete this prezi?

Neither you, nor the coeditors you shared it with will be able to recover it again.

DeleteCancel

Uncharted territory:

No description
by

Medical Development Team

on 16 April 2014

Comments (0)

Please log in to add your comment.

Report abuse

Transcript of Uncharted territory:

Uncharted territory:
QTA 2014
Rationale for Change
Time to evolve current tool – in use since 2007
Overall score does not always give a true reflection of quality in a programme
Does not allow for scoring of ‘red flags’
Misalignment between ‘enforcement notices’ and high scores
Need to emphasise areas of high risk to client safety

What has changed?
How do changes affect the score?
How does the new format work work?
Applicable to all service delivery channels
New and improved format
Select red, amber, or green from a drop-down menu against Additional observations
Type other observations here
Weighted checklist
Clinical governance
10% reduction to Clinical Governance score if marks received are less than or equal to 80%
5% reduction to Clinical Governance score if marks received are less than 90% but greater than 80%
Infection prevention
10% reduction to the Infection prevention if marks received are less than or equal to 80%
5% reduction to Infection prevention score if marks received are less than 90% but greater than 80%
Red flags!
Other observations (for issues not captured by checklist, at discretion of the assessor)

5% reduction against a site’s overall score for observations receiving a Medium risk rating
10% reduction against a site’s overall score for observations receiving a High risk rating
Where more than one ‘red flag’ identified for the site, top score included.

P&L Updates
New indicator in Clinical Governance:

“The Programme team audit stock control records on at least a 6 monthly basis and evidence of feedback provided to MAT”.

New 'Supplies Management' section
Entering information
Score Summary
Same as 2013 Checklist
Final score
Scores below 90% highlighted in red
Social franchise QTA
Formatting:
Identical formatting and inputting of information
Identical score summary set-up
Weighting and reductions
10% reduction for IP and CG scores below 75%
5% reduction for IP and CG scores below 85%
Identical weighting of additional observations (i.e. 10% reduction for high risk, 5% for medium risk)
No reduction for services offered but not observed
Thank you!
80%
73%
-5% to centre 1 score due to an infection prevention score below 90%
-5% to centre 2 score due to an infection prevention score below 90%
-5% to centre 3 score due to an infection prevention score below 90%
-4% to outreach 2 score due to MSL and MSV services being offered but not observed
-10% for 'High Risk' additional observation
-10% to clinical governance score due to a score below 80%
Obstetric QTA
Identical formatting and inputting of information
Identical score summary set-up
Identical weighting and benchmarking
Reduction for services offered and not observed (unless 10 case files have been reviewed)
Penalty for caseload
2% reduction to a site’s overall score if it has been agreed that a service will be observed, but that service is not observed.

This will be supported by the introduction of a ‘contract’ into the TOR – through which the programme and assessor can agree in advance of the QTA which services the assessor can expect to observe, based on services that are routinely provided within the programme.
-10% to centre 1 score as no STP, MSTP, MSL, and MSV clients were observed despite these services being offered
-10% to centre 2 score as no STP, MSTP, MSL, and MSV clients were observed despite these services being offered
-12% to centre 3 score as no MSP, STP, MSTP, MSL, and MSV clients were observed despite these services being offered
-4% to outreach 1 score due to MSL and MSV services being offered but not observed
-10% for infection prevention score equal to 80%
-4% for not observing MSL and MSV despite these services being offered
Overall score reduced to from 93% to 78%
Error messages to alert the assessor if information has been incorrectly entered
Score no of 1 no longer applies to standards achieved before the end of the visit
Opportunity to enter whether you expected to observe the procedure, and how many were observed.
Score summary includes information about whether observation expectation have been met.
Checklists are available on the Best Practice Gateway or via your link Medical Advisor.
Full transcript