• Greg Ogrinc, Louise Davies, Daisy Goodman, Paul Batalden, Frank Davidoff, and David Stevens.
• Greg Ogrinc is senior associate dean for medical education, Geisel School of Medicine at Dartmouth, associate chief of staff for education, White River Junction VA, and associate professor of community and family medicine, medicine, and The Dartmouth Institute for Health Policy and Clinical Practice at the Geisel School of Medicine at Dartmouth, Hanover, New Hampshire. Louise Davies is senior scholar, Quality Scholars Program, Department of Veterans Affairs Medical Center, White River Junction, Vermont, and associate professor of surgery, Geisel School of Medicine and The Dartmouth Institute for Health Policy & Clinical Practice, Hanover, New Hampshire. Daisy Goodman is fellow, VA Quality Scholars Fellowship Program and instructor of obstetrics and gynecology and community and family medicine at the Geisel School of Medicine at Dartmouth, Hanover, New Hampshire. Paul Batalden is active emeritus professor, pediatrics and community and family medicine, Geisel School of Medicine and The Dartmouth Institute for Health Policy and Clinical Practice, Hanover, New Hampshire. Frank Davidoff is editor emeritus, Annals of Internal Medicine, and adjunct professor at The Dartmouth Institute for Health Policy and Clinical Practice, Geisel School of Medicine at Dartmouth, Hanover, New Hampshire. David Stevens is adjunct professor, The Dartmouth Institute for Health Policy and Clinical Practice, Hanover, New Hampshire; editor emeritus, BMJ Quality and Safety, London, England; and senior fellow, Institute for Healthcare Improvement, Cambridge, Massachusetts. greg.ogrinc@va.gov.
• Am. J. Crit. Care. 2015 Nov 1; 24 (6): 466-73.

AbstractSince the publication of Standards for Quality Improvement Reporting Excellence (SQUIRE 1.0) guidelines in 2008, the science of the field has advanced considerably. In this manuscript, we describe the development of SQUIRE 2.0 and its key components. We undertook the revision between 2012 and 2015 using (1) semistructured interviews and focus groups to evaluate SQUIRE 1.0 plus feedback from an international steering group, (2) two face-to-face consensus meetings to develop interim drafts, and (3) pilot testing with authors and a public comment period. SQUIRE 2.0 emphasizes the reporting of 3 key components of systematic efforts to improve the quality, value, and safety of health care: the use of formal and informal theory in planning, implementing, and evaluating improvement work; the context in which the work is done; and the study of the intervention(s). SQUIRE 2.0 is intended for reporting the range of methods used to improve health care, recognizing that they can be complex and multidimensional. It provides common ground to share these discoveries in the scholarly literature (www.squire-statement.org).©2015 American Association of Critical-Care Nurses.

12 keywords...

hide…