The Measure of an Outcome: Comparing Norming and Stacking to Benchmark the Effectiveness of Brain Injury Rehabilitation Services

Practitioners have a clinical, ethical, academic, and economic responsibility to dispassionately consider how effective their services are. Approaches to measure how “good” or “bad” healthcare is include clinical audit, satisfaction surveys, and routine outcome measurement. However, the process of c...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Sara D. S. Ramos, Rudi Coetzer
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: MDPI AG 2023-08-01
Series:Behavioral Sciences
Subjects:
Online Access:https://www.mdpi.com/2076-328X/13/9/705
_version_ 1827727186977619968
author Sara D. S. Ramos
Rudi Coetzer
author_facet Sara D. S. Ramos
Rudi Coetzer
author_sort Sara D. S. Ramos
collection DOAJ
description Practitioners have a clinical, ethical, academic, and economic responsibility to dispassionately consider how effective their services are. Approaches to measure how “good” or “bad” healthcare is include clinical audit, satisfaction surveys, and routine outcome measurement. However, the process of comparing the clinical outcomes of a specific service against the ‘best’ services in the same specialism, also known as benchmarking, remains challenging, and it is unclear how it affects quality improvement. This paper piloted and compared two different approaches to benchmarking to assess clinical outcomes in neurorehabilitation. Norming involved comparing routine measures of clinical outcome with external validators. Stacking involved pooling and comparing internal data across several years. The analyses of routine clinical outcome data from 167 patients revealed significant differences in the patient characteristics of those admitted to the same service provider over time, but no differences in outcomes achieved when comparing with historical data or with external reference data. These findings illustrate the potential advantages and limitations of using stacking and norming to benchmark clinical outcomes, and how the results from each approach might be used to evaluate service effectiveness and inform quality improvement within the field of brain injury rehabilitation.
first_indexed 2024-03-10T23:03:00Z
format Article
id doaj.art-e19cca1739fe4f4b9f204b7948358eef
institution Directory Open Access Journal
issn 2076-328X
language English
last_indexed 2024-03-10T23:03:00Z
publishDate 2023-08-01
publisher MDPI AG
record_format Article
series Behavioral Sciences
spelling doaj.art-e19cca1739fe4f4b9f204b7948358eef2023-11-19T09:34:38ZengMDPI AGBehavioral Sciences2076-328X2023-08-0113970510.3390/bs13090705The Measure of an Outcome: Comparing Norming and Stacking to Benchmark the Effectiveness of Brain Injury Rehabilitation ServicesSara D. S. Ramos0Rudi Coetzer1Brainkind, Wakefield WF5 9TJ, UKBrainkind, Wakefield WF5 9TJ, UKPractitioners have a clinical, ethical, academic, and economic responsibility to dispassionately consider how effective their services are. Approaches to measure how “good” or “bad” healthcare is include clinical audit, satisfaction surveys, and routine outcome measurement. However, the process of comparing the clinical outcomes of a specific service against the ‘best’ services in the same specialism, also known as benchmarking, remains challenging, and it is unclear how it affects quality improvement. This paper piloted and compared two different approaches to benchmarking to assess clinical outcomes in neurorehabilitation. Norming involved comparing routine measures of clinical outcome with external validators. Stacking involved pooling and comparing internal data across several years. The analyses of routine clinical outcome data from 167 patients revealed significant differences in the patient characteristics of those admitted to the same service provider over time, but no differences in outcomes achieved when comparing with historical data or with external reference data. These findings illustrate the potential advantages and limitations of using stacking and norming to benchmark clinical outcomes, and how the results from each approach might be used to evaluate service effectiveness and inform quality improvement within the field of brain injury rehabilitation.https://www.mdpi.com/2076-328X/13/9/705acquired brain injuryclinical evaluationholistic neurorehabilitationquality improvementservice development
spellingShingle Sara D. S. Ramos
Rudi Coetzer
The Measure of an Outcome: Comparing Norming and Stacking to Benchmark the Effectiveness of Brain Injury Rehabilitation Services
Behavioral Sciences
acquired brain injury
clinical evaluation
holistic neurorehabilitation
quality improvement
service development
title The Measure of an Outcome: Comparing Norming and Stacking to Benchmark the Effectiveness of Brain Injury Rehabilitation Services
title_full The Measure of an Outcome: Comparing Norming and Stacking to Benchmark the Effectiveness of Brain Injury Rehabilitation Services
title_fullStr The Measure of an Outcome: Comparing Norming and Stacking to Benchmark the Effectiveness of Brain Injury Rehabilitation Services
title_full_unstemmed The Measure of an Outcome: Comparing Norming and Stacking to Benchmark the Effectiveness of Brain Injury Rehabilitation Services
title_short The Measure of an Outcome: Comparing Norming and Stacking to Benchmark the Effectiveness of Brain Injury Rehabilitation Services
title_sort measure of an outcome comparing norming and stacking to benchmark the effectiveness of brain injury rehabilitation services
topic acquired brain injury
clinical evaluation
holistic neurorehabilitation
quality improvement
service development
url https://www.mdpi.com/2076-328X/13/9/705
work_keys_str_mv AT saradsramos themeasureofanoutcomecomparingnormingandstackingtobenchmarktheeffectivenessofbraininjuryrehabilitationservices
AT rudicoetzer themeasureofanoutcomecomparingnormingandstackingtobenchmarktheeffectivenessofbraininjuryrehabilitationservices
AT saradsramos measureofanoutcomecomparingnormingandstackingtobenchmarktheeffectivenessofbraininjuryrehabilitationservices
AT rudicoetzer measureofanoutcomecomparingnormingandstackingtobenchmarktheeffectivenessofbraininjuryrehabilitationservices