Skip to main content

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))

From: Evaluation of emergency department performance – a systematic review on recommended performance and quality-in-care measures

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
  1. ED Emergency Department, IOM Institute of Medicine, NHS National Health Services, PCT Primary Care Trust, PEC Paediatric Emergency Care, PED Paediatric Emergency Department, SPC Statistical Process Control.