Top 10 of barriers that were targeted by the InFoQI program
| Statements | Category | (Strongly) agreed* (%) |
|---|---|---|
| I trust the quality of our own indicator data† | Indicators | 91 |
| I am motivated to use indicator data for QI† | Professional | 83 |
| The definitions of the indicators are clear | Professional | 80 |
| At our ICU, someone is responsible for collecting and submitting the indicator data | Environment | 79 |
| The frequency of the InFoQI feedback reports was sufficiently high† | Intervention | 77 |
| I agree with the NVIC guideline that one qualified ICU nurse should care for a maximum of two patients simultaneously | Indicator | 74 |
| I am well informed with regard to the definitions of the indicators | Professional | 70 |
| I find it easy to adapt my existing routines to implement indicators† | Environment | 66 |
| The use of the InFoQI program leads to improved quality of patient care | Intervention | 63 |
| Using structure- and process indicators has resulted in better quality at my ICU | Indicators | 63 |
ICU, intensive care unit; InFoQI, Information Feedback on Quality Indicators; NVIC, Netherlands Society of Intensive Care; QI, quality improvement.
*The higher the percentage, the less important the barrier.
†Barriers were also identified in the barrier analysis prior to the implementation of the program.