Skip to main content
. 2019 Feb 16;28(8):635–644. doi: 10.1136/bmjqs-2018-008354

Table 1.

Definitions of performance and engagement used to classify hospital sites into four quadrants

Variable Definitions Data sources used Site classification process
Performance
ie, how successful was the hospital in achieving ‘green’ on the 6 Dashboard KPIs? 		High performance on KPIs (P+):

  • *Of the KPIs that could be improved (red/yellow),>50% of KPIs improved to green between 1 April 2013 and 31 March 2016 and

  • Green on ≥4 KPIs as of 31 March 2016


Low performance on KPIs (P-):

  • Of the KPIs that could be improved (red/yellow), ≤50% of KPIs improved to green between 1 April 2013 and 31 March 2016 and

  • Green on ≤3 KPIs as of 31 March 2016

  • Provincial registry data

 Two analysts independently classified each of the 14 sites as ‘high’ or ‘low’ performance.
Consensus was reached for all 14 sites.
Engagement
ie, overall, how engaged was the hospital in using the Dashboard to facilitate clinical practice change on the KPIs? 		High engagement with Dashboard (E+):

  • Provided examples of use of the Dashboard and targeted efforts to facilitate clinical practice change on the KPIs


Low engagement with Dashboard (E-):

  • Provided limited examples of use of the Dashboard and targeted efforts to facilitate clinical practice change on the KPIs

  • Interviews

  • Focus groups

  • Hospital documents

  • Observations

  • Photographs

  • Field notes

  • Interpretive summaries

 Two analysts independently classified each of the 14 sites as ‘high’ or ‘low’ engagement.
Consensus was reached for all 14 sites.

*With the exception of one site who was already green on six KPIs in April 2013. This site was recruited to provide the team with a case who had been successful with sustaining a high level of performance on the KPIs over a 3-year period.

E, engagement with Dashboard; KPI, key performance indicator; P, performance on KPIs.