Skip to main content
Quality & Safety in Health Care logoLink to Quality & Safety in Health Care
. 2005 Dec;14(6):450–454. doi: 10.1136/qshc.2005.014456

Control, compare and communicate: designing control charts to summarise efficiently data from multiple quality indicators

B Guthrie 1, T Love 1, T Fahey 1, A Morris 1, F Sullivan 1
PMCID: PMC1744105  PMID: 16326793

Abstract



 Summarising the complex data generated by multiple cross sectional quality indicators in a way that patients, clinicians, managers and policymakers find useful is challenging. A common approach is aggregation to create summary measures such as star ratings and balanced score cards, but these may conceal the detail needed to focus quality improvement. We propose an alternative way of summarising and presenting multiple quality indicators, suitable for use for quality improvement and governance. This paper discusses (1) control charts for repeated measurements of single processes as used in industrial statistical process control (SPC); (2) control charts for cross sectional comparison of many institutions for a single quality indicator (rarely used in industry but commonly proposed for health care); and (3) small multiple graphics which combine control chart signal extraction with efficient graphical presentations for multiple indicators.

Full Text

The Full Text of this article is available as a PDF (120.7 KB).

Selected References

These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.

  1. Adab Peymané, Rouse Andrew M., Mohammed Mohammed A., Marshall Tom. Performance league tables: the NHS deserves better. BMJ. 2002 Jan 12;324(7329):95–98. doi: 10.1136/bmj.324.7329.95. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Adu Dwomoa, Cockwell Paul, Ives Natalie J., Shaw Jonathan, Wheatley Keith. Interleukin-2 receptor monoclonal antibodies in renal transplantation: meta-analysis of randomised trials. BMJ. 2003 Apr 12;326(7393):789–789. doi: 10.1136/bmj.326.7393.789. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Blackstone Eugene H. Monitoring surgical performance. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2004 Dec;128(6):807–810. doi: 10.1016/j.jtcvs.2004.03.022. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Bridgewater Ben, Adult Cardiac Surgeons of North West England Mortality data in adult cardiac surgery for named surgeons: retrospective examination of prospectively collected data on coronary artery surgery and aortic valve replacement. BMJ. 2005 Mar 5;330(7490):506–510. doi: 10.1136/bmj.330.7490.506. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Guthrie Bruce, Emslie-Smith Alistair, Morris Andrew, Fahey Tom, Sullivan Frank. Quality measurement of care for people with type 2 diabetes in Tayside, Scotland: implications for the new UK general practice contract. Br J Gen Pract. 2003 Sep;53(494):709–713. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Hibbard Judith H., Slovic Paul, Peters Ellen, Finucane Melissa L. Strategies for reporting health plan performance information to consumers: evidence from controlled studies. Health Serv Res. 2002 Apr;37(2):291–313. doi: 10.1111/1475-6773.024. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Keogh Bruce, Spiegelhalter David, Bailey Alan, Roxburgh James, Magee Patrick, Hilton Colin. The legacy of Bristol: public disclosure of individual surgeons' results. BMJ. 2004 Aug 21;329(7463):450–454. doi: 10.1136/bmj.329.7463.450. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Kirk S. A., Campbell S. M., Kennell-Webb S., Reeves D., Roland M. O., Marshall M. N. Assessing the quality of care of multiple conditions in general practice: practical and methodological problems. Qual Saf Health Care. 2003 Dec;12(6):421–427. doi: 10.1136/qhc.12.6.421. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Marshall Tom, Mohammed Mohammed A., Rouse Andrew. A randomized controlled trial of league tables and control charts as aids to health service decision-making. Int J Qual Health Care. 2004 Aug;16(4):309–315. doi: 10.1093/intqhc/mzh054. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. McGettigan P., Sly K., O'Connell D., Hill S., Henry D. The effects of information framing on the practices of physicians. J Gen Intern Med. 1999 Oct;14(10):633–642. doi: 10.1046/j.1525-1497.1999.09038.x. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. Morris A. D., Boyle D. I., MacAlpine R., Emslie-Smith A., Jung R. T., Newton R. W., MacDonald T. M. The diabetes audit and research in Tayside Scotland (DARTS) study: electronic record linkage to create a diabetes register. DARTS/MEMO Collaboration. BMJ. 1997 Aug 30;315(7107):524–528. doi: 10.1136/bmj.315.7107.524. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. Vaiana Mary E., McGlynn Elizabeth A. What cognitive science tells us about the design of reports for consumers. Med Care Res Rev. 2002 Mar;59(1):3–35. doi: 10.1177/107755870205900101. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. Werner Rachel M., Asch David A. The unintended consequences of publicly reporting quality information. JAMA. 2005 Mar 9;293(10):1239–1244. doi: 10.1001/jama.293.10.1239. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Associated Data

This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

Supplementary Materials

[Web-only figures]

Articles from Quality & safety in health care are provided here courtesy of BMJ Publishing Group

RESOURCES