Top 10 of most important barriers to using the InFoQI program for local, systematic QI
| Statements | Category | (Strongly) agreed* (%) |
|---|---|---|
| Other staff members have access to and know where to find the InFoQI feedback reports† | Intervention | 7 |
| A normative standard for ‘ICU Length of Stay’ and ‘duration of mechanical ventilation’ is not required for deciding if improvement is needed† | Indicators | 21 |
| I know how to use the InFoQI program to improve the quality of care | Intervention | 22 |
| Implementation of the InFoQI program in daily practice was feasible due to sufficient allocated time† | Environment | 25 |
| The indicators are up-to-date and do not need revision | Indicators | 26 |
| The collection of indicator data does not increase the probability of interference of third parties outside the ICU | Environment | 28 |
| Implementation of the InFoQI program in daily practice was feasible due to sufficient staff | Environment | 30 |
| The definition of the indicators contributes to useful benchmark data | Indicators | 30 |
| The positive impact of using indicators outweighs the required efforts | Indicators | 31 |
| Data are sufficiently adjusted for case mix to facilitate determining the need for QI actions† | Indicators | 32 |
ICU, intensive care unit; InFoQI, Information Feedback on Quality Indicators; QI, quality improvement.
*The lower the percentage, the more important the barrier.
†Barriers were also identified in the barrier analysis prior to the implementation of the program.