Table 2 Presentation of included literature (* Focus indicates whether the suggested indicators are more generally applicable or refers to clinical conditions (e.g. indicators related to specific ailments))
Corresponding author | Year | Objective | Focus* | Setting | Method | Gross indicatorportfolio | Recommended indicators |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
McClelland et al. [33] | 2012 | Examination of practical aspects in collecting time-based ED measures | Time-relatedmeasures only (7) | American, EDs | Structured interviews and few data comparisons | 7 | 7 |
Beniuk, Boyle & Clarkson [29] | 2012 | To prioritise quantified crowding measures to assess current ED status | Overall (8) | International EDs (USA, UK, Canada, Australia, Netherlands and Hong Kong) | Standard three round Delphi study | 27 | 8 |
Alessandrini et al. [15] | 2011 | Proposition of a measurement framework specific for PEC practitioners and administrators | Overall (13) and condition specific (1) | American, PEDs | Point of departure in IOM recommendations. Alteration into Donabedian’s structure, process, outcome categorisation | 120 | 14 |
Ekelund et al. [34] | 2011 | 1) To assess feasibility in gathering benchmark data in Swedish EDs and 2) to evaluate patient throughput times and inflow patterns | Overall (4) | Sweden, EDs | Comparison of variables reflecting quality measures | 4 | 4 |
Heyworth [35] | 2011 | 1) Benefits and drawbacks associated with a single time-related measure and 2) proposed quality indicators to assess timeliness, quality, and safety | Overall (8) | United Kingdom, EDs | Description of current state in the UK; reflection on the quality indicators proposed by the Department of Health | 8 | 8 |
Schull et al. [21] | 2011 | Seeks consensus on a set of parsimonious quality-of-care indicators for an ED | Overall (11) and condition specific (2) | Canada, EDs | Modified Delphi panel technique, three rounds | 170 | 13 |
Welch et al. [32] | 2011 | Consensus of a standard set of performance measures in EDs related to patient flow | Overall (44) | American, North American Benchmark Summit (367 EDs) | Survey and audit | 44 | 44 |
Coleman & Nicholl [16] | 2010 | Identification of a indicators usable for PCT commissioners and NHS decision makers to monitor performance | Overall (16) | United Kingdom, EDs and Urgent Care Units | Standard three round Delphi study | 70 | 16 |
Hung & Chalut [30] | 2008 | 1) Presents which indicators are deemed most useful to assess PEC and 2) which measures are currently being recorded | Overall (15) | Canada, PEDs | 2-part questionnaire including a novel ranking formula to prioritize indicators | 67 | 15 |
Guttmann et al. [31] | 2006 | Development of measures relevant for paediatric emergency care (children < 19) | Overall (6) and condition specific (8) | American, PEDs | Structured panel process with underlying literature review | 109 | 14 |
Sibbritt, Isbister & Walker [36] | 2006 | Provision of a recommended list of performance indicators from routinely collected data in EDs | Overall (9) | Australia, EDs | Data collection and following SPC analysis | 9 | 9 |
Solberg et al. [3] | 2003 | Identification of measures in EDs relevant for managing crowding | Overall (38) | American, EDs | Expert consensus on 113 measures; 10 investigators refined the measures to a total of 38 | 113 | 38 |
Graff et al. [8] | 2002 | How to critically evaluate quality in an ED | Overall (9) and condition specific (29) | American, EDs | Summary. Point of departure in IOM recommendations. Afterwards alteration into Donabedian’s structure, process, outcome categorisation | 38 | 38 |
Lindsay et al. [20] | 2002 | A systematic approach to identify valid and relevant measures in an ED | Overall (8) and condition specific (13) | Canada, EDs | Modified Delphi panel technique, two rounds | 104 | 21 |