article review on total quality management pdf

To read this content please select one of the options below:

Please note you do not have access to teaching notes, a systematic literature review on total quality management critical success factors and the identification of new avenues of research.

The TQM Journal

ISSN : 1754-2731

Article publication date: 9 January 2017

The purpose of this paper is to present a systematic literature review to identify new avenues of research in line with the ongoing changes in quality and management required to firms, especially regarding customers.

Design/methodology/approach

This study uses a systematic review of the literature contained in the three databases Ebsco, JSTOR, and Springerlink and on the search engine Google Scholar.

An analysis of the literature identifies three different clusters of papers: “identification” papers, which show that customer focus has gained importance in recent times; “implementation” papers, which highlight that a general or shared model or scale to successfully implement total quality management (TQM) does not yet exist; and “impact-on-performance” papers, which show that few studies have considered the relationship between TQM and the issues of both marketing and performance, underlining the most significant gap in the TQM literature.

Research limitations/implications

This study is limited by the small number of databases and search engines used and by the restricted number of keywords used in searching these sources.

Practical implications

This work highlights a gap in the existing research and thus an incomplete consideration of the interplay between management, marketing, and quality issues, all centered on customers and other stakeholders. Researchers and firms are thus advised to adopt a wider view that considers the role of the quality process to support the firm’s engagement of customers in activities that enhance both the customer role and customer satisfaction.

Originality/value

This study uses a systematic literature review to review all critical factors of TQM and identifies new research avenues and different approaches to implementing TQM, focusing on the central role that customers play in achieving firm success.

Total quality management
Systematic literature review
Firm performance
Critical success factors (CSFs)
Stakeholder involvement
Customer centrality and involvement

Aquilani, B. , Silvestri, C. , Ruggieri, A. and Gatti, C. (2017), "A systematic literature review on total quality management critical success factors and the identification of new avenues of research", The TQM Journal , Vol. 29 No. 1, pp. 184-213. https://doi.org/10.1108/TQM-01-2016-0003

Emerald Publishing Limited

We’re listening — tell us what you think, something didn’t work….

Report bugs here

All feedback is valuable

Please share your general feedback

Join us on our journey

Platform update page.

Visit emeraldpublishing.com/platformupdate to discover the latest news and updates

Questions & More Information

Answers to the most commonly asked questions here

From total quality management to Quality 4.0: A systematic literature review and future research agenda

Review Article
Open access
Published: 13 March 2023
Volume 10 , pages 191–205, ( 2023 )

Cite this article

You have full access to this open access article

article review on total quality management pdf

Hu-Chen Liu 1 ,
Ran Liu 1 ,
Xiuzhu Gu 2 &
Miying Yang 3

3100 Accesses

9 Citations

Explore all metrics

Quality 4.0 is an emerging concept that has been increasingly appreciated because of the intensification of competition, continually changing customer requirements and technological evolution. It deals with aligning quality management practices with the emergent capabilities of Industry 4.0 to improve cost, time, and efficiency and increase product quality. This article aims to comprehensively review extant studies related to Quality 4.0 to uncover current research trends, distil key research topics, and identify areas for future research. Thus, 46 journal articles extracted from the Scopus database from 2017 to 2022 were collected and reviewed. A descriptive analysis was first performed according to the year-wise publication, sources of publication, and research methods. Then, the selected articles were analyzed and classified according to four research themes: Quality 4.0 concept, Quality 4.0 implementation, quality management in Quality 4.0, and Quality 4.0 model and application. By extracting the literature review findings, we identify the Quality 4.0 definitions and features, develop the quality curve theory, and highlight future research opportunities. This study supports practitioners, managers, and academicians in effectively recognizing and applying Quality 4.0 to enhance customer satisfaction, achieve innovation enterprise efficiency, and increase organizational competitiveness in the era of Industry 4.0.

Article PDF

Download to read the full article text

Customer experience: fundamental premises and implications for research

Larissa Becker & Elina Jaakkola

The customer value proposition: evolution, development, and application in marketing

Adrian Payne, Pennie Frow & Andreas Eggert

Customer engagement in social media: a framework and meta-analysis

Fernando de Oliveira Santini, Wagner Junior Ladeira, … Barry J. Babin

Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.

Ali K, Johl S K (2022). Soft and hard TQM practices: Future research agenda for Industry 4.0. Total Quality Management & Business Excellence, 33(13–14): 1625–1655

Article Google Scholar

Alzahrani B, Bahaitham H, Andejany M, Elshennawy A (2021). How ready is higher education for Quality 4.0 transformation according to the LNS research framework? Sustainability, 13(9): 5169

Antony J, McDermott O, Sony M (2022a). Quality 4.0 conceptualisation and theoretical understanding: A global exploratory qualitative study. TQM Journal, 34(5): 1169–1188

Antony J, Sony M, Furterer S, McDermott O, Pepper M (2022b). Quality 4.0 and its impact on organizational performance: An integrative viewpoint. TQM Journal, 34(6): 2069–2084

Antony J, Sony M, McDermott O, Jayaraman R, Flynn D (2023). An exploration of organizational readiness factors for Quality 4.0: An intercontinental study and future research directions. International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, 40(2): 582–606

Asif M (2020). Are QM models aligned with Industry 4.0? A perspective on current practices. Journal of Cleaner Production, 258: 120820

Balouei Jamkhaneh H, Shahin A, Parkouhi S V, Shahin R (2022). The new concept of quality in the digital era: A human resource empowerment perspective. TQM Journal, 34(1): 125–144

Baran E, Korkusuz Polat T (2022). Classification of Industry 4.0 for total quality management: A review. Sustainability, 14(6): 3329

Broday E E (2022). The evolution of quality: From inspection to Quality 4.0. International Journal of Quality and Service Sciences, 14(3): 368–382

Bui L T C, Carvalho M, Pham H T, Nguyen T T B, Duong A T B, Truong Quang H (2022). Supply chain quality management 4.0: Conceptual and maturity frameworks. International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, in press, doi: https://doi.org/10.1108/IJQRM-07-2021-0251

Chiarini A (2020). Industry 4.0, quality management and TQM world: A systematic literature review and a proposed agenda for further research. TQM Journal, 32(4): 603–616

Chiarini A, Kumar M (2022). What is Quality 4.0? An exploratory sequential mixed methods study of Italian manufacturing companies. International Journal of Production Research, 60(16): 4890–4910

Christou I T, Kefalakis N, Soldatos J K, Despotopoulou A M (2022). End-to-end industrial IoT platform for Quality 4.0 applications. Computers in Industry, 137: 103591

Clancy R, Bruton K, O’Sullivan D T J, Cloonan A J (2022). The HyDAPI framework: A versatile tool integrating Lean Six Sigma and digitalisation for improved quality management in Industry 4.0. International Journal of Lean Six Sigma, in press, doi: https://doi.org/10.1108/IJLSS-12-2021-0214

Di Vaio A, Hassan R, Alavoine C (2022). Data intelligence and analytics: A bibliometric analysis of human-artificial intelligence in public sector decision-making effectiveness. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 174: 121201

Dias A M, Carvalho A M, Sampaio P (2022). Quality 4.0: Literature review analysis, definition and impacts of the digital transformation process on quality. International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, 39(6): 1312–1335

Elibal K, Özceylan E (2022). Comparing Industry 4.0 maturity models in the perspective of TQM principles using Fuzzy MCDM methods. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 175: 121379

Emblemsvåg J (2020). On Quality 4.0 in project-based industries. TQM Journal, 32(4): 725–739

Escobar C A, McGovern M E, Morales-Menendez R (2021). Quality 4.0: A review of big data challenges in manufacturing. Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing, 32(8): 2319–2334

Fonseca L, Amaral A, Oliveira J (2021). Quality 4.0: The EFQM 2020 model and Industry 4.0 relationships and implications. Sustainability, 13(6): 3107

Gebhardt M, Kopyto M, Birkel H, Hartmann E (2022). Industry 4.0 technologies as enablers of collaboration in circular supply chains: A systematic literature review. International Journal of Production Research, 60(23): 6967–6995

Glogovac M, Ruso J, Maricic M (2022). ISO 9004 maturity model for quality in Industry 4.0. Total Quality Management & Business Excellence, 33(5–6): 529–547

Hyun Park S, Seon Shin W, Hyun Park Y, Lee Y (2017). Building a new culture for quality management in the era of the Fourth Industrial Revolution. Total Quality Management & Business Excellence, 28(9–10): 934–945

Jacob D (2017). What is Quality 4.0? Online Blog

Kannan K S P N, Garad A (2021). Competencies of quality professionals in the era of Industry 4.0: A case study of electronics manufacturer from Malaysia. International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, 38(3): 839–871

Maganga D P, Taifa I W R (2022). Quality 4.0 transition framework for Tanzanian manufacturing industries. TQM Journal, in press, doi: https://doi.org/10.1108/TQM-01-2022-0036

Maganga D P, Taifa I W R (2023). Quality 4.0 conceptualisation: An emerging quality management concept for manufacturing industries. TQM Journal, 35(2): 389–413

Nenadál J, Vykydal D, Halfarová P, Tylečková E (2022). Quality 4.0 maturity assessment in light of the current situation in the Czech Republic. Sustainability, 14(12): 7519

Prashar A (2022). Quality management in Industry 4.0 environment: A morphological analysis and research agenda. International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, in press, doi: 10.1108/IJQRM-10-2021-0348

Ramezani J, Jassbi J (2020). Quality 4.0 in action: Smart hybrid fault diagnosis system in plaster production. Processes, 8(6): 634

Ranjith Kumar R, Ganesh L S, Rajendran C (2022). Quality 4.0: A review of and framework for quality management in the digital era. International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, 39(6): 1385–1411

Sader S, Husti I, Daróczi M (2019). Industry 4.0 as a key enabler toward successful implementation of total quality management practices. Periodica Polytechnica Social and Management Sciences, 27(2): 131–140

Sader S, Husti I, Daroczi M (2022). A review of Quality 4.0: Definitions, features, technologies, applications, and challenges. Total Quality Management & Business Excellence, 33(9–10): 1164–1182

Saihi A, Awad M, Ben-Daya M (2023). Quality 4.0: Leveraging Industry 4.0 technologies to improve quality management practices, a systematic review. International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, 40(2): 628–650

Santos G, Sá J C, Félix M J, Barreto L, Carvalho F, Doiro M, Zgodavová K, Stefanović M (2021). New needed quality management skills for quality managers 4.0. Sustainability, 13(11): 6149

Sariyer G, Mangla S K, Kazancoglu Y, Ocal Tasar C, Luthra S (2021). Data analytics for quality management in Industry 4.0 from an MSME perspective. Annals of Operations Research, in press, doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10479-021-04215-9

Silva C S, Borges A F, Magano J (2022). Quality Control 4.0: A way to improve the quality performance and engage shop floor operators. International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, 39(6): 1471–1487

Singh J, Ahuja I P S, Singh H, Singh A (2022). Development and implementation of Autonomous Quality Management System (AQMS) in an automotive manufacturing using Quality 4.0 concept: A case study. Computers & Industrial Engineering, 168: 108121

Sony M, Antony J, Douglas J A (2020). Essential ingredients for the implementation of Quality 4.0: A narrative review of literature and future directions for research. TQM Journal, 32(4): 779–793

Sony M, Antony J, Douglas J A, McDermott O (2021). Motivations, barriers and readiness factors for Quality 4.0 implementation: An exploratory study. TQM Journal, 33(6): 1502–1515

Souza F F, Corsi A, Pagani R N, Balbinotti G, Kovaleski J L (2022). Total quality management 4.0: Adapting quality management to Industry 4.0. TQM Journal, 34(4): 749–769

Sozinova A A, Saveleva N K (2022). Marketing quality management in Industry 4.0 in transborder markets. International Journal of Qualitative Research, 16(3): 955–968

Sureshchandar G S (2022). Quality 4.0: Understanding the criticality of the dimensions using the analytic hierarchy process (AHP) technique. International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, 39(6): 1336–1367

Sureshchandar G S (2023). Quality 4.0: A measurement model using the confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) approach. International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, 40(1): 280–303

Tambare P, Meshram C, Lee C C, Ramteke R J, Imoize A L (2022). Performance measurement system and quality management in data-driven Industry 4.0: A review. Sensors, 22(1): 224

Tan T, Mills G, Papadonikolaki E, Liu Z (2021). Combining multi-criteria decision making (MCDM) methods with building information modelling (BIM): A review. Automation in Construction, 121: 103451

Thekkoote R (2022). Enabler toward successful implementation of Quality 4.0 in digital transformation era: A comprehensive review and future research agenda. International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, 39(6): 1368–1384

Yadav N, Shankar R, Singh S P (2021). Critical success factors for Lean Six Sigma in Quality 4.0. International Journal of Quality and Service Sciences, 13(1): 123–156

Zheng T, Ardolino M, Bacchetti A, Perona M (2021). The applications of Industry 4.0 technologies in manufacturing context: A systematic literature review. International Journal of Production Research, 59(6): 1922–1954

Zonnenshain A, Kenett R S (2020). Quality 4.0: The challenging future of quality engineering. Quality Engineering, 32(4): 614–626

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

School of Economics and Management, Tongji University, Shanghai, 200092, China

Hu-Chen Liu & Ran Liu

Department of Industrial Engineering and Economics, Tokyo Institute of Technology, Tokyo, 152-8552, Japan

Group of Sustainability, School of Management, Cranfield University, Cranfield, MK43 0AL, UK

Miying Yang

You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ran Liu .

Additional information

This work was partially supported by the major project of National Social Science Fund of China (Grant No. 21ZDA024).

Rights and permissions

The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ .

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Liu, HC., Liu, R., Gu, X. et al. From total quality management to Quality 4.0: A systematic literature review and future research agenda. Front. Eng. Manag. 10 , 191–205 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s42524-022-0243-z

Download citation

Received : 31 July 2022

Accepted : 01 November 2022

Published : 13 March 2023

Issue Date : June 2023

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s42524-022-0243-z

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

quality management
Quality 4.0
Industry 4.0
literature review
predictive quality

Find a journal
Publish with us
Track your research

Academia.edu no longer supports Internet Explorer.

To browse Academia.edu and the wider internet faster and more securely, please take a few seconds to upgrade your browser .

Enter the email address you signed up with and we'll email you a reset link.

We're Hiring!
Help Center

Reviewing the Literature on Total Quality Management and Organizational Performance

Journal of Business & Management (COES&RJ-JBM)

Related Papers

2008 4th IEEE International Conference on Management of Innovation and Technology

Tritos Laosirihongthong

Assoc. Prof. Cross Ogohi Daniel

This study came to examine the impact of Total Quality management (TQM) as instrument in achieving on the organisational performance. TQM is defined as a policy that essentially aimed at establish and deliver high quality products and services that cover all their client's demands and achieve a high level of customer satisfaction. Total Quality Management (TQM) is a management is an administrative approach for firms focused on quality, in light of the cooperation and every individuals and aims at long haul accomplishment through consumer's loyalty and advantages to all individuals from the associations and society. The impact of many organisations failure to properly implement TQM by all administration level, challenges the organisation ability to organise frequent employee training have been a big problem. This research work attempt to find out the effect of TQM execution in the board inclusion, challenges disturbing the usages, impact of employee training and TQM standard application to the accomplishment of organisational goal. The key discoveries demonstrated that rehearsing TQM but it is yet to implement it to the highest level of subscribing to a quality reward system. The implementation of TQM is at the quality assurance level. It was discovered that administration inactions undermined initiative promise to quality and rendered TQM rehearsal insufficient. It is through questionnaires method and oral interview that data are collected from the aforementioned organisations. References were made to journals, related books, internet the aforementioned organization concurred that TQM have in hierarchical execution.

Journal of emerging technologies and innovative research

mudit saxena

Total quality management (TQM) is well thought-out a very important factor for the long-term success of an organization. TQM implementation has been an important aspect for improving organisational effectiveness. While examining the relationship between TQM and performance scholars have used different performance types such as financial, innovative, operational and quality performance. Recent research on total quality management has examined the relationships between the Total quality management and organizational performance. TQM focuses on continuous process improvement within organizations to provide better customer value and meet customer requirements.

Management Science Letters

Yuni Pambreni

Dr.VENKATAIAH CHITTIPAKA

Purpose: The purpose of this paper is to study the relationship between Total Quality Management (TQM) practices and organizational performance in Indian automobile manufacturing companies. Design/Methodology/Approach: The research was conducted in five Indian automobile manufacturing companies located in Chennai cluster taking a sample size of 375 employees across the five Indian automobile manufacturing companies using the questionnaire method. The relationship between Total Quality Management (TQM) practices and organizational performance was examined through Correlation analysis. Findings: The study revealed that the extent to which Total Quality Management (TQM) practices and Organizational performance are correlated and how Total Quality Management (TQM) practices impacts on organizational performance. Research Limitations/Implications: The research paper was limited by including only five Indian automobile manufacturing companies located in Chennai cluster, making this a possibly biased selection and it may not be adequate to generalize the results for the entire Indian automobile manufacturing companies.

Abdul Aziz Abdul Rahman

EBIASUODE AWU

Nita Sukdeo

Organisations in South Africa now, more than ever before, need to introduce Total Quality Management (TQM) in their organisational culture to provide outstanding products and services to their customers. Although TQM has been introduced to improve organisational performance, it is perceived that some organisations have not accomplished much over the years. Achieving results by implementing TQM is challenging and depends on (i) leadership, (ii) employee involvement, (iii) customer focus, (iv) strategic planning, (v) supplier relations, (vi) process management and (vii) information analysis. These principles must be incorporated in the organisational performance measures in terms of (i) quality improvement, (ii) product/service quality, (iii) customer satisfaction, (iv) employee satisfaction and (v) supplier performance. Current research in both the manufacturing and service industries in South Africa reveals that TQM does have an influence on the five organisational performance measu...

AkNadiaram AN

In this study, there will be a testing of the strength of the relationship between TQM practice and the performance of the organisation and with the use of covariates, the size of the company, the type of industry and the ISO 9000 certification status. There will be an analysis of a very large and random sample of 150 manufacturing companies in Saudi Arabia was chosen for the study. The main finding that is made here that TQM tends to have mixed results when it is covaried for company size and the type of industry involved. It was found that the relationship that exists between TQM and organisational performance is not very much affected when it is covaried for ISO 9000 certification status.

stanley chizoba

This research work is an evaluation of total quality management and organizational performance of Nigeria brewery PLC, Ama, Enugu state. The main objective of this research is to ascertain the relationship between total quality management and organizational performance. In order to carry out this study the researcher adopted a descriptive survey method, using a structured questionnaire for data collection. The questionnaire was administered to the workers of Nigeria brewery PLC, Ama and the population of the study was 60. The population was further reduced using Taro Yameni giving a sample of 52 respondents; however chi-square was used in analyzing the data. The result of the study reveals that there is a significant relationship between TQM and organizational performance, Total Quality Management has significant influence on the performance of Nigeria Brewery PLC, Ama, Enugu state and external influences like the business environment were discovered to limit the operation of TQM in Nigeria Brewery PLC, Ama Enugu state. The researcher concludes that TQM has a positive and significant high impact on the performance of Nigeria Brewery PLC, Ama, Enugu state. The researcher recommends that periodic training should be organized by the management of the company, to equip the employees with the knowledge of quality improvement techniques and the management should spell out standards of their products, so as to ensure that any product that is below standard would be improved upon by their corrective measures. The implication of this study is that TQM is still relevant in today’s organizations.

A scoping review of continuous quality improvement in healthcare system: conceptualization, models and tools, barriers and facilitators, and impact

Aklilu Endalamaw 1 , 2 ,
Resham B Khatri 1 , 3 ,
Tesfaye Setegn Mengistu 1 , 2 ,
Daniel Erku 1 , 4 , 5 ,
Eskinder Wolka 6 ,
Anteneh Zewdie 6 &
Yibeltal Assefa 1

BMC Health Services Research volume 24 , Article number: 487 ( 2024 ) Cite this article

370 Accesses

Metrics details

The growing adoption of continuous quality improvement (CQI) initiatives in healthcare has generated a surge in research interest to gain a deeper understanding of CQI. However, comprehensive evidence regarding the diverse facets of CQI in healthcare has been limited. Our review sought to comprehensively grasp the conceptualization and principles of CQI, explore existing models and tools, analyze barriers and facilitators, and investigate its overall impacts.

This qualitative scoping review was conducted using Arksey and O’Malley’s methodological framework. We searched articles in PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, and EMBASE databases. In addition, we accessed articles from Google Scholar. We used mixed-method analysis, including qualitative content analysis and quantitative descriptive for quantitative findings to summarize findings and PRISMA extension for scoping reviews (PRISMA-ScR) framework to report the overall works.

A total of 87 articles, which covered 14 CQI models, were included in the review. While 19 tools were used for CQI models and initiatives, Plan-Do-Study/Check-Act cycle was the commonly employed model to understand the CQI implementation process. The main reported purposes of using CQI, as its positive impact, are to improve the structure of the health system (e.g., leadership, health workforce, health technology use, supplies, and costs), enhance healthcare delivery processes and outputs (e.g., care coordination and linkages, satisfaction, accessibility, continuity of care, safety, and efficiency), and improve treatment outcome (reduce morbidity and mortality). The implementation of CQI is not without challenges. There are cultural (i.e., resistance/reluctance to quality-focused culture and fear of blame or punishment), technical, structural (related to organizational structure, processes, and systems), and strategic (inadequate planning and inappropriate goals) related barriers that were commonly reported during the implementation of CQI.

Conclusions

Implementing CQI initiatives necessitates thoroughly comprehending key principles such as teamwork and timeline. To effectively address challenges, it’s crucial to identify obstacles and implement optimal interventions proactively. Healthcare professionals and leaders need to be mentally equipped and cognizant of the significant role CQI initiatives play in achieving purposes for quality of care.

Peer Review reports

Continuous quality improvement (CQI) initiative is a crucial initiative aimed at enhancing quality in the health system that has gradually been adopted in the healthcare industry. In the early 20th century, Shewhart laid the foundation for quality improvement by describing three essential steps for process improvement: specification, production, and inspection [ 1 , 2 ]. Then, Deming expanded Shewhart’s three-step model into ‘plan, do, study/check, and act’ (PDSA or PDCA) cycle, which was applied to management practices in Japan in the 1950s [ 3 ] and was gradually translated into the health system. In 1991, Kuperman applied a CQI approach to healthcare, comprising selecting a process to be improved, assembling a team of expert clinicians that understands the process and the outcomes, determining key steps in the process and expected outcomes, collecting data that measure the key process steps and outcomes, and providing data feedback to the practitioners [ 4 ]. These philosophies have served as the baseline for the foundation of principles for continuous improvement [ 5 ].

Continuous quality improvement fosters a culture of continuous learning, innovation, and improvement. It encourages proactive identification and resolution of problems, promotes employee engagement and empowerment, encourages trust and respect, and aims for better quality of care [ 6 , 7 ]. These characteristics drive the interaction of CQI with other quality improvement projects, such as quality assurance and total quality management [ 8 ]. Quality assurance primarily focuses on identifying deviations or errors through inspections, audits, and formal reviews, often settling for what is considered ‘good enough’, rather than pursuing the highest possible standards [ 9 , 10 ], while total quality management is implemented as the management philosophy and system to improve all aspects of an organization continuously [ 11 ].

Continuous quality improvement has been implemented to provide quality care. However, providing effective healthcare is a complicated and complex task in achieving the desired health outcomes and the overall well-being of individuals and populations. It necessitates tackling issues, including access, patient safety, medical advances, care coordination, patient-centered care, and quality monitoring [ 12 , 13 ], rooted long ago. It is assumed that the history of quality improvement in healthcare started in 1854 when Florence Nightingale introduced quality improvement documentation [ 14 ]. Over the passing decades, Donabedian introduced structure, processes, and outcomes as quality of care components in 1966 [ 15 ]. More comprehensively, the Institute of Medicine in the United States of America (USA) has identified effectiveness, efficiency, equity, patient-centredness, safety, and timeliness as the components of quality of care [ 16 ]. Moreover, quality of care has recently been considered an integral part of universal health coverage (UHC) [ 17 ], which requires initiatives to mobilise essential inputs [ 18 ].

While the overall objective of CQI in health system is to enhance the quality of care, it is important to note that the purposes and principles of CQI can vary across different contexts [ 19 , 20 ]. This variation has sparked growing research interest. For instance, a review of CQI approaches for capacity building addressed its role in health workforce development [ 21 ]. Another systematic review, based on random-controlled design studies, assessed the effectiveness of CQI using training as an intervention and the PDSA model [ 22 ]. As a research gap, the former review was not directly related to the comprehensive elements of quality of care, while the latter focused solely on the impact of training using the PDSA model, among other potential models. Additionally, a review conducted in 2015 aimed to identify barriers and facilitators of CQI in Canadian contexts [ 23 ]. However, all these reviews presented different perspectives and investigated distinct outcomes. This suggests that there is still much to explore in terms of comprehensively understanding the various aspects of CQI initiatives in healthcare.

As a result, we conducted a scoping review to address several aspects of CQI. Scoping reviews serve as a valuable tool for systematically mapping the existing literature on a specific topic. They are instrumental when dealing with heterogeneous or complex bodies of research. Scoping reviews provide a comprehensive overview by summarizing and disseminating findings across multiple studies, even when evidence varies significantly [ 24 ]. In our specific scoping review, we included various types of literature, including systematic reviews, to enhance our understanding of CQI.

This scoping review examined how CQI is conceptualized and measured and investigated models and tools for its application while identifying implementation challenges and facilitators. It also analyzed the purposes and impact of CQI on the health systems, providing valuable insights for enhancing healthcare quality.

Protocol registration and results reporting

Protocol registration for this scoping review was not conducted. Arksey and O’Malley’s methodological framework was utilized to conduct this scoping review [ 25 ]. The scoping review procedures start by defining the research questions, identifying relevant literature, selecting articles, extracting data, and summarizing the results. The review findings are reported using the PRISMA extension for a scoping review (PRISMA-ScR) [ 26 ]. McGowan and colleagues also advised researchers to report findings from scoping reviews using PRISMA-ScR [ 27 ].

Defining the research problems

This review aims to comprehensively explore the conceptualization, models, tools, barriers, facilitators, and impacts of CQI within the healthcare system worldwide. Specifically, we address the following research questions: (1) How has CQI been defined across various contexts? (2) What are the diverse approaches to implementing CQI in healthcare settings? (3) Which tools are commonly employed for CQI implementation ? (4) What barriers hinder and facilitators support successful CQI initiatives? and (5) What effects CQI initiatives have on the overall care quality?

Information source and search strategy

We conducted the search in PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, and EMBASE databases, and the Google Scholar search engine. The search terms were selected based on three main distinct concepts. One group was CQI-related terms. The second group included terms related to the purpose for which CQI has been implemented, and the third group included processes and impact. These terms were selected based on the Donabedian framework of structure, process, and outcome [ 28 ]. Additionally, the detailed keywords were recruited from the primary health framework, which has described lists of dimensions under process, output, outcome, and health system goals of any intervention for health [ 29 ]. The detailed search strategy is presented in the Supplementary file 1 (Search strategy). The search for articles was initiated on August 12, 2023, and the last search was conducted on September 01, 2023.

Eligibility criteria and article selection

Based on the scoping review’s population, concept, and context frameworks [ 30 ], the population included any patients or clients. Additionally, the concepts explored in the review encompassed definitions, implementation, models, tools, barriers, facilitators, and impacts of CQI. Furthermore, the review considered contexts at any level of health systems. We included articles if they reported results of qualitative or quantitative empirical study, case studies, analytic or descriptive synthesis, any review, and other written documents, were published in peer-reviewed journals, and were designed to address at least one of the identified research questions or one of the identified implementation outcomes or their synonymous taxonomy as described in the search strategy. Based on additional contexts, we included articles published in English without geographic and time limitations. We excluded articles with abstracts only, conference abstracts, letters to editors, commentators, and corrections.

We exported all citations to EndNote x20 to remove duplicates and screen relevant articles. The article selection process includes automatic duplicate removal by using EndNote x20, unmatched title and abstract removal, citation and abstract-only materials removal, and full-text assessment. The article selection process was mainly conducted by the first author (AE) and reported to the team during the weekly meetings. The first author encountered papers that caused confusion regarding whether to include or exclude them and discussed them with the last author (YA). Then, decisions were ultimately made. Whenever disagreements happened, they were resolved by discussion and reconsideration of the review questions in relation to the written documents of the article. Further statistical analysis, such as calculating Kappa, was not performed to determine article inclusion or exclusion.

Data extraction and data items

We extracted first author, publication year, country, settings, health problem, the purpose of the study, study design, types of intervention if applicable, CQI approaches/steps if applicable, CQI tools and procedures if applicable, and main findings using a customized Microsoft Excel form.

Summarizing and reporting the results

The main findings were summarized and described based on the main themes, including concepts under conceptualizing, principles, teams, timelines, models, tools, barriers, facilitators, and impacts of CQI. Results-based convergent synthesis, achieved through mixed-method analysis, involved content analysis to identify the thematic presentation of findings. Additionally, a narrative description was used for quantitative findings, aligning them with the appropriate theme. The authors meticulously reviewed the primary findings from each included material and contextualized these findings concerning the main themes1. This approach provides a comprehensive understanding of complex interventions and health systems, acknowledging quantitative and qualitative evidence.

Search results

A total of 11,251 documents were identified from various databases: SCOPUS ( n = 4,339), PubMed ( n = 2,893), Web of Science ( n = 225), EMBASE ( n = 3,651), and Google Scholar ( n = 143). After removing duplicates ( n = 5,061), 6,190 articles were evaluated by title and abstract. Subsequently, 208 articles were assessed for full-text eligibility. Following the eligibility criteria, 121 articles were excluded, leaving 87 included in the current review (Fig. 1 ).

Article selection process

Operationalizing continuous quality improvement

Continuous Quality Improvement (CQI) is operationalized as a cyclic process that requires commitment to implementation, teamwork, time allocation, and celebrating successes and failures.

CQI is a cyclic ongoing process that is followed reflexive, analytical and iterative steps, including identifying gaps, generating data, developing and implementing action plans, evaluating performance, providing feedback to implementers and leaders, and proposing necessary adjustments [ 31 , 32 , 33 , 34 , 35 , 36 , 37 , 38 ].

CQI requires committing to the philosophy, involving continuous improvement [ 19 , 38 ], establishing a mission statement [ 37 ], and understanding quality definition [ 19 ].

CQI involves a wide range of patient-oriented measures and performance indicators, specifically satisfying internal and external customers, developing quality assurance, adopting common quality measures, and selecting process measures [ 8 , 19 , 35 , 36 , 37 , 39 , 40 ].

CQI requires celebrating success and failure without personalization, leading each team member to develop error-free attitudes [ 19 ]. Success and failure are related to underlying organizational processes and systems as causes of failure rather than blaming individuals [ 8 ] because CQI is process-focused based on collaborative, data-driven, responsive, rigorous and problem-solving statistical analysis [ 8 , 19 , 38 ]. Furthermore, a gap or failure opens another opportunity for establishing a data-driven learning organization [ 41 ].

CQI cannot be implemented without a CQI team [ 8 , 19 , 37 , 39 , 42 , 43 , 44 , 45 , 46 ]. A CQI team comprises individuals from various disciplines, often comprising a team leader, a subject matter expert (physician or other healthcare provider), a data analyst, a facilitator, frontline staff, and stakeholders [ 39 , 43 , 47 , 48 , 49 ]. It is also important to note that inviting stakeholders or partners as part of the CQI support intervention is crucial [ 19 , 38 , 48 ].

The timeline is another distinct feature of CQI because the results of CQI vary based on the implementation duration of each cycle [ 35 ]. There is no specific time limit for CQI implementation, although there is a general consensus that a cycle of CQI should be relatively short [ 35 ]. For instance, a CQI implementation took 2 months [ 42 ], 4 months [ 50 ], 9 months [ 51 , 52 ], 12 months [ 53 , 54 , 55 ], and one year and 5 months [ 49 ] duration to achieve the desired positive outcome, while bi-weekly [ 47 ] and monthly data reviews and analyses [ 44 , 48 , 56 ], and activities over 3 months [ 57 ] have also resulted in a positive outcome.

Continuous quality improvement models and tools

There have been several models are utilized. The Plan-Do-Study/Check-Act cycle is a stepwise process involving project initiation, situation analysis, root cause identification, solution generation and selection, implementation, result evaluation, standardization, and future planning [ 7 , 36 , 37 , 45 , 47 , 48 , 49 , 50 , 51 , 53 , 56 , 57 , 58 , 59 , 60 , 61 , 62 , 63 , 64 , 65 , 66 , 67 , 68 , 69 , 70 ]. The FOCUS-PDCA cycle enhances the PDCA process by adding steps to find and improve a process (F), organize a knowledgeable team (O), clarify the process (C), understand variations (U), and select improvements (S) [ 55 , 71 , 72 , 73 ]. The FADE cycle involves identifying a problem (Focus), understanding it through data analysis (Analyze), devising solutions (Develop), and implementing the plan (Execute) [ 74 ]. The Logic Framework involves brainstorming to identify improvement areas, conducting root cause analysis to develop a problem tree, logically reasoning to create an objective tree, formulating the framework, and executing improvement projects [ 75 ]. Breakthrough series approach requires CQI teams to meet in quarterly collaborative learning sessions, share learning experiences, and continue discussion by telephone and cross-site visits to strengthen learning and idea exchange [ 47 ]. Another CQI model is the Lean approach, which has been conducted with Kaizen principles [ 52 ], 5 S principles, and the Six Sigma model. The 5 S (Sort, Set/Straighten, Shine, Standardize, Sustain) systematically organises and improves the workplace, focusing on sorting, setting order, shining, standardizing, and sustaining the improvement [ 54 , 76 ]. Kaizen principles guide CQI by advocating for continuous improvement, valuing all ideas, solving problems, focusing on practical, low-cost improvements, using data to drive change, acknowledging process defects, reducing variability and waste, recognizing every interaction as a customer-supplier relationship, empowering workers, responding to all ideas, and maintaining a disciplined workplace [ 77 ]. Lean Six Sigma, a CQI model, applies the DMAIC methodology, which involves defining (D) and measuring the problem (M), analyzing root causes (A), improving by finding solutions (I), and controlling by assessing process stability (C) [ 78 , 79 ]. The 5 C-cyclic model (consultation, collection, consideration, collaboration, and celebration), the first CQI framework for volunteer dental services in Aboriginal communities, ensures quality care based on community needs [ 80 ]. One study used meetings involving activities such as reviewing objectives, assigning roles, discussing the agenda, completing tasks, retaining key outputs, planning future steps, and evaluating the meeting’s effectiveness [ 81 ].

Various tools are involved in the implementation or evaluation of CQI initiatives: checklists [ 53 , 82 ], flowcharts [ 81 , 82 , 83 ], cause-and-effect diagrams (fishbone or Ishikawa diagrams) [ 60 , 62 , 79 , 81 , 82 ], fuzzy Pareto diagram [ 82 ], process maps [ 60 ], time series charts [ 48 ], why-why analysis [ 79 ], affinity diagrams and multivoting [ 81 ], and run chart [ 47 , 48 , 51 , 60 , 84 ], and others mentioned in the table (Table 1 ).

Barriers and facilitators of continuous quality improvement implementation

Implementing CQI initiatives is determined by various barriers and facilitators, which can be thematized into four dimensions. These dimensions are cultural, technical, structural, and strategic dimensions.

Continuous quality improvement initiatives face various cultural, strategic, technical, and structural barriers. Cultural dimension barriers involve resistance to change (e.g., not accepting online technology), lack of quality-focused culture, staff reporting apprehensiveness, and fear of blame or punishment [ 36 , 41 , 85 , 86 ]. The technical dimension barriers of CQI can include various factors that hinder the effective implementation and execution of CQI processes [ 36 , 86 , 87 , 88 , 89 ]. Structural dimension barriers of CQI arise from the organization structure, process, and systems that can impede the effective implementation and sustainability of CQI [ 36 , 85 , 86 , 87 , 88 ]. Strategic dimension barriers are, for example, the inability to select proper CQI goals and failure to integrate CQI into organizational planning and goals [ 36 , 85 , 86 , 87 , 88 , 90 ].

Facilitators are also grouped to cultural, structural, technical, and strategic dimensions to provide solutions to CQI barriers. Cultural challenges were addressed by developing a group culture to CQI and other rewards [ 39 , 41 , 80 , 85 , 86 , 87 , 90 , 91 , 92 ]. Technical facilitators are pivotal to improving technical barriers [ 39 , 42 , 53 , 69 , 86 , 90 , 91 ]. Structural-related facilitators are related to improving communication, infrastructure, and systems [ 86 , 92 , 93 ]. Strategic dimension facilitators include strengthening leadership and improving decision-making skills [ 43 , 53 , 67 , 86 , 87 , 92 , 94 , 95 ] (Table 2 ).

Impact of continuous quality improvement

Continuous quality improvement initiatives can significantly impact the quality of healthcare in a wide range of health areas, focusing on improving structure, the health service delivery process and improving client wellbeing and reducing mortality.

Structure components

These are health leadership, financing, workforce, technology, and equipment and supplies. CQI has improved planning, monitoring and evaluation [ 48 , 53 ], and leadership and planning [ 48 ], indicating improvement in leadership perspectives. Implementing CQI in primary health care (PHC) settings has shown potential for maintaining or reducing operation costs [ 67 ]. Findings from another study indicate that the costs associated with implementing CQI interventions per facility ranged from approximately $2,000 to $10,500 per year, with an average cost of approximately $10 to $60 per admitted client [ 57 ]. However, based on model predictions, the average cost savings after implementing CQI were estimated to be $5430 [ 31 ]. CQI can also be applied to health workforce development [ 32 ]. CQI in the institutional system improved medical education [ 66 , 96 , 97 ], human resources management [ 53 ], motivated staffs [ 76 ], and increased staff health awareness [ 69 ], while concerns raised about CQI impartiality, independence, and public accountability [ 96 ]. Regarding health technology, CQI also improved registration and documentation [ 48 , 53 , 98 ]. Furthermore, the CQI initiatives increased cleanliness [ 54 ] and improved logistics, supplies, and equipment [ 48 , 53 , 68 ].

Process and output components

The process component focuses on the activities and actions involved in delivering healthcare services.

Service delivery

CQI interventions improved service delivery [ 53 , 56 , 99 ], particularly a significant 18% increase in the overall quality of service performance [ 48 ], improved patient counselling, adherence to appropriate procedures, and infection prevention [ 48 , 68 ], and optimised workflow [ 52 ].

Coordination and collaboration

CQI initiatives improved coordination and collaboration through collecting and analysing data, onsite technical support, training, supportive supervision [ 53 ] and facilitating linkages between work processes and a quality control group [ 65 ].

Patient satisfaction

The CQI initiatives increased patient satisfaction and improved quality of life by optimizing care quality management, improving the quality of clinical nursing, reducing nursing defects and enhancing the wellbeing of clients [ 54 , 76 , 100 ], although CQI was not associated with changes in adolescent and young adults’ satisfaction [ 51 ].

CQI initiatives reduced medication error reports from 16 to 6 [ 101 ], and it significantly reduced the administration of inappropriate prophylactic antibiotics [ 44 ], decreased errors in inpatient care [ 52 ], decreased the overall episiotomy rate from 44.5 to 33.3% [ 83 ], reduced the overall incidence of unplanned endotracheal extubation [ 102 ], improving appropriate use of computed tomography angiography [ 103 ], and appropriate diagnosis and treatment selection [ 47 ].

Continuity of care

CQI initiatives effectively improve continuity of care by improving client and physician interaction. For instance, provider continuity levels showed a 64% increase [ 55 ]. Modifying electronic medical record templates, scheduling, staff and parental education, standardization of work processes, and birth to 1-year age-specific incentives in post-natal follow-up care increased continuity of care to 74% in 2018 compared to baseline 13% in 2012 [ 84 ].

The CQI initiative yielded enhanced efficiency in the cardiac catheterization laboratory, as evidenced by improved punctuality in procedure starts and increased efficiency in manual sheath-pulls inside [ 78 ].

Accessibility

CQI initiatives were effective in improving accessibility in terms of increasing service coverage and utilization rate. For instance, screening for cigarettes, nutrition counselling, folate prescription, maternal care, immunization coverage [ 53 , 81 , 104 , 105 ], reducing the percentage of non-attending patients to surgery to 0.9% from the baseline 3.9% [ 43 ], increasing Chlamydia screening rates from 29 to 60% [ 45 ], increasing HIV care continuum coverage [ 51 , 59 , 60 ], increasing in the uptake of postpartum long-acting reversible contraceptive use from 6.9% at the baseline to 25.4% [ 42 ], increasing post-caesarean section prophylaxis from 36 to 89% [ 62 ], a 31% increase of kangaroo care practice [ 50 ], and increased follow-up [ 65 ]. Similarly, the QI intervention increased the quality of antenatal care by 29.3%, correct partograph use by 51.7%, and correct active third-stage labour management, a 19.6% improvement from the baseline, but not significantly associated with improvement in contraceptive service uptake [ 61 ].

Timely access

CQI interventions improved the time care provision [ 52 ], and reduced waiting time [ 62 , 74 , 76 , 106 ]. For instance, the discharge process waiting time in the emergency department decreased from 76 min to 22 min [ 79 ]. It also reduced mean postprocedural length of stay from 2.8 days to 2.0 days [ 31 ].

Acceptability

Acceptability of CQI by healthcare providers was satisfactory. For instance, 88% of the faculty, 64% of the residents, and 82% of the staff believed CQI to be useful in the healthcare clinic [ 107 ].

Outcome components

Morbidity and mortality.

CQI efforts have demonstrated better management outcomes among diabetic patients [ 40 ], patients with oral mucositis [ 71 ], and anaemic patients [ 72 ]. It has also reduced infection rate in post-caesarean Sect. [ 62 ], reduced post-peritoneal dialysis peritonitis [ 49 , 108 ], and prevented pressure ulcers [ 70 ]. It is explained by peritonitis incidence from once every 40.1 patient months at baseline to once every 70.8 patient months after CQI [ 49 ] and a 63% reduction in pressure ulcer prevalence within 2 years from 2008 to 2010 [ 70 ]. Furthermore, CQI initiatives significantly reduced in-hospital deaths [ 31 ] and increased patient survival rates [ 108 ]. Figure 2 displays the overall process of the CQI implementations.

The overall mechanisms of continuous quality improvement implementation

In this review, we examined the fundamental concepts and principles underlying CQI, the factors that either hinder or assist in its successful application and implementation, and the purpose of CQI in enhancing quality of care across various health issues.

Our findings have brought attention to the application and implementation of CQI, emphasizing its underlying concepts and principles, as evident in the existing literature [ 31 , 32 , 33 , 34 , 35 , 36 , 39 , 40 , 43 , 45 , 46 ]. Continuous quality improvement has shared with the principles of continuous improvement, such as a customer-driven focus, effective leadership, active participation of individuals, a process-oriented approach, systematic implementation, emphasis on design improvement and prevention, evidence-based decision-making, and fostering partnership [ 5 ]. Moreover, Deming’s 14 principles laid the foundation for CQI principles [ 109 ]. These principles have been adapted and put into practice in various ways: ten [ 19 ] and five [ 38 ] principles in hospitals, five principles for capacity building [ 38 ], and two principles for medication error prevention [ 41 ]. As a principle, the application of CQI can be process-focused [ 8 , 19 ] or impact-focused [ 38 ]. Impact-focused CQI focuses on achieving specific outcomes or impacts, whereas process-focused CQI prioritizes and improves the underlying processes and systems. These principles complement each other and can be utilized based on the objectives of quality improvement initiatives in healthcare settings. Overall, CQI is an ongoing educational process that requires top management’s involvement, demands coordination across departments, encourages the incorporation of views beyond clinical area, and provides non-judgemental evidence based on objective data [ 110 ].

The current review recognized that it was not easy to implement CQI. It requires reasonable utilization of various models and tools. The application of each tool can be varied based on the studied health problem and the purpose of CQI initiative [ 111 ], varied in context, content, structure, and usability [ 112 ]. Additionally, overcoming the cultural, technical, structural, and strategic-related barriers. These barriers have emerged from clinical staff, managers, and health systems perspectives. Of the cultural obstacles, staff non-involvement, resistance to change, and reluctance to report error were staff-related. In contrast, others, such as the absence of celebration for success and hierarchical and rational culture, may require staff and manager involvement. Staff members may exhibit reluctance in reporting errors due to various cultural factors, including lack of trust, hierarchical structures, fear of retribution, and a blame-oriented culture. These challenges pose obstacles to implementing standardized CQI practices, as observed, for instance, in community pharmacy settings [ 85 ]. The hierarchical culture, characterized by clearly defined levels of power, authority, and decision-making, posed challenges to implementing CQI initiatives in public health [ 41 , 86 ]. Although rational culture, a type of organizational culture, emphasizes logical thinking and rational decision-making, it can also create challenges for CQI implementation [ 41 , 86 ] because hierarchical and rational cultures, which emphasize bureaucratic norms and narrow definitions of achievement, were found to act as barriers to the implementation of CQI [ 86 ]. These could be solved by developing a shared mindset and collective commitment, establishing a shared purpose, developing group norms, and cultivating psychological preparedness among staff, managers, and clients to implement and sustain CQI initiatives. Furthermore, reversing cultural-related barriers necessitates cultural-related solutions: development of a culture and group culture to CQI [ 41 , 86 ], positive comprehensive perception [ 91 ], commitment [ 85 ], involving patients, families, leaders, and staff [ 39 , 92 ], collaborating for a common goal [ 80 , 86 ], effective teamwork [ 86 , 87 ], and rewarding and celebrating successes [ 80 , 90 ].

The technical dimension barriers of CQI can include inadequate capitalization of a project and insufficient support for CQI facilitators and data entry managers [ 36 ], immature electronic medical records or poor information systems [ 36 , 86 ], and the lack of training and skills [ 86 , 87 , 88 ]. These challenges may cause the CQI team to rely on outdated information and technologies. The presence of barriers on the technical dimension may challenge the solid foundation of CQI expertise among staff, the ability to recognize opportunities for improvement, a comprehensive understanding of how services are produced and delivered, and routine use of expertise in daily work. Addressing these technical barriers requires knowledge creation activities (training, seminar, and education) [ 39 , 42 , 53 , 69 , 86 , 90 , 91 ], availability of quality data [ 86 ], reliable information [ 92 ], and a manual-online hybrid reporting system [ 85 ].

Structural dimension barriers of CQI include inadequate communication channels and lack of standardized process, specifically weak physician-to-physician synergies [ 36 ], lack of mechanisms for disseminating knowledge and limited use of communication mechanisms [ 86 ]. Lack of communication mechanism endangers sharing ideas and feedback among CQI teams, leading to misunderstandings, limited participation and misinterpretations, and a lack of learning [ 113 ]. Knowledge translation facilitates the co-production of research, subsequent diffusion of knowledge, and the developing stakeholder’s capacity and skills [ 114 ]. Thus, the absence of a knowledge translation mechanism may cause missed opportunities for learning, inefficient problem-solving, and limited creativity. To overcome these challenges, organizations should establish effective communication and information systems [ 86 , 93 ] and learning systems [ 92 ]. Though CQI and knowledge translation have interacted with each other, it is essential to recognize that they are distinct. CQI focuses on process improvement within health care systems, aiming to optimize existing processes, reduce errors, and enhance efficiency.

In contrast, knowledge translation bridges the gap between research evidence and clinical practice, translating research findings into actionable knowledge for practitioners. While both CQI and knowledge translation aim to enhance health care quality and patient outcomes, they employ different strategies: CQI utilizes tools like Plan-Do-Study-Act cycles and statistical process control, while knowledge translation involves knowledge synthesis and dissemination. Additionally, knowledge translation can also serve as a strategy to enhance CQI. Both concepts share the same principle: continuous improvement is essential for both. Therefore, effective strategies on the structural dimension may build efficient and effective steering councils, information systems, and structures to diffuse learning throughout the organization.

Strategic factors, such as goals, planning, funds, and resources, determine the overall purpose of CQI initiatives. Specific barriers were improper goals and poor planning [ 36 , 86 , 88 ], fragmentation of quality assurance policies [ 87 ], inadequate reinforcement to staff [ 36 , 90 ], time constraints [ 85 , 86 ], resource inadequacy [ 86 ], and work overload [ 86 ]. These barriers can be addressed through strengthening leadership [ 86 , 87 ], CQI-based mentoring [ 94 ], periodic monitoring, supportive supervision and coaching [ 43 , 53 , 87 , 92 , 95 ], participation, empowerment, and accountability [ 67 ], involving all stakeholders in decision-making [ 86 , 87 ], a provider-payer partnership [ 64 ], and compensating staff for after-hours meetings on CQI [ 85 ]. The strategic dimension, characterized by a strategic plan and integrated CQI efforts, is devoted to processes that are central to achieving strategic priorities. Roles and responsibilities are defined in terms of integrated strategic and quality-related goals [ 115 ].

The utmost goal of CQI has been to improve the quality of care, which is usually revealed by structure, process, and outcome. After resolving challenges and effectively using tools and running models, the goal of CQI reflects the ultimate reason and purpose of its implementation. First, effectively implemented CQI initiatives can improve leadership, health financing, health workforce development, health information technology, and availability of supplies as the building blocks of a health system [ 31 , 48 , 53 , 68 , 98 ]. Second, effectively implemented CQI initiatives improved care delivery process (counselling, adherence with standards, coordination, collaboration, and linkages) [ 48 , 53 , 65 , 68 ]. Third, the CQI can improve outputs of healthcare delivery, such as satisfaction, accessibility (timely access, utilization), continuity of care, safety, efficiency, and acceptability [ 52 , 54 , 55 , 76 , 78 ]. Finally, the effectiveness of the CQI initiatives has been tested in enhancing responses related to key aspects of the HIV response, maternal and child health, non-communicable disease control, and others (e.g., surgery and peritonitis). However, it is worth noting that CQI initiative has not always been effective. For instance, CQI using a two- to nine-times audit cycle model through systems assessment tools did not bring significant change to increase syphilis testing performance [ 116 ]. This study was conducted within the context of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people’s primary health care settings. Notably, ‘the clinics may not have consistently prioritized syphilis testing performance in their improvement strategies, as facilitated by the CQI program’ [ 116 ]. Additionally, by applying CQI-based mentoring, uptake of facility-based interventions was not significantly improved, though it was effective in increasing community health worker visits during pregnancy and the postnatal period, knowledge about maternal and child health and exclusive breastfeeding practice, and HIV disclosure status [ 117 ]. The study conducted in South Africa revealed no significant association between the coverage of facility-based interventions and Continuous Quality Improvement (CQI) implementation. This lack of association was attributed to the already high antenatal and postnatal attendance rates in both control and intervention groups at baseline, leaving little room for improvement. Additionally, the coverage of HIV interventions remained consistently high throughout the study period [ 117 ].

Regarding health care and policy implications, CQI has played a vital role in advancing PHC and fostering the realization of UHC goals worldwide. The indicators found in Donabedian’s framework that are positively influenced by CQI efforts are comparable to those included in the PHC performance initiative’s conceptual framework [ 29 , 118 , 119 ]. It is clearly explained that PHC serves as the roadmap to realizing the vision of UHC [ 120 , 121 ]. Given these circumstances, implementing CQI can contribute to the achievement of PHC principles and the objectives of UHC. For instance, by implementing CQI methods, countries have enhanced the accessibility, affordability, and quality of PHC services, leading to better health outcomes for their populations. CQI has facilitated identifying and resolving healthcare gaps and inefficiencies, enabling countries to optimize resource allocation and deliver more effective and patient-centered care. However, it is crucial to recognize that the successful implementation of Continuous Quality Improvement (CQI) necessitates optimizing the duration of each cycle, understanding challenges and barriers that extend beyond the health system and settings, and acknowledging that its effectiveness may be compromised if these challenges are not adequately addressed.

Despite abundant literature, there are still gaps regarding the relationship between CQI and other dimensions within the healthcare system. No studies have examined the impact of CQI initiatives on catastrophic health expenditure, effective service coverage, patient-centredness, comprehensiveness, equity, health security, and responsiveness.

Limitations

In conducting this review, it has some limitations to consider. Firstly, only articles published in English were included, which may introduce the exclusion of relevant non-English articles. Additionally, as this review follows a scoping methodology, the focus is on synthesising available evidence rather than critically evaluating or scoring the quality of the included articles.

Continuous quality improvement is investigated as a continuous and ongoing intervention, where the implementation time can vary across different cycles. The CQI team and implementation timelines were critical elements of CQI in different models. Among the commonly used approaches, the PDSA or PDCA is frequently employed. In most CQI models, a wide range of tools, nineteen tools, are commonly utilized to support the improvement process. Cultural, technical, structural, and strategic barriers and facilitators are significant in implementing CQI initiatives. Implementing the CQI initiative aims to improve health system blocks, enhance health service delivery process and output, and ultimately prevent morbidity and reduce mortality. For future researchers, considering that CQI is context-dependent approach, conducting scale-up implementation research about catastrophic health expenditure, effective service coverage, patient-centredness, comprehensiveness, equity, health security, and responsiveness across various settings and health issues would be valuable.

Availability of data and materials

The data used and/or analyzed during the current study are available in this manuscript and/or the supplementary file.

Shewhart WA, Deming WE. Memoriam: Walter A. Shewhart, 1891–1967. Am Stat. 1967;21(2):39–40.

Article Google Scholar

Shewhart WA. Statistical method from the viewpoint of quality control. New York: Dover; 1986. ISBN 978-0486652320. OCLC 13822053. Reprint. Originally published: Washington, DC: Graduate School of the Department of Agriculture, 1939.

Moen R, editor Foundation and History of the PDSA Cycle. Asian network for quality conference Tokyo. https://www.deming.org/sites/default/files/pdf/2015/PDSA_History_Ron_MoenPdf . 2009.

Kuperman G, James B, Jacobsen J, Gardner RM. Continuous quality improvement applied to medical care: experiences at LDS hospital. Med Decis Making. 1991;11(4suppl):S60–65.

Article CAS PubMed Google Scholar

Singh J, Singh H. Continuous improvement philosophy–literature review and directions. Benchmarking: An International Journal. 2015;22(1):75–119.

Goldstone J. Presidential address: Sony, Porsche, and vascular surgery in the 21st century. J Vasc Surg. 1997;25(2):201–10.

Radawski D. Continuous quality improvement: origins, concepts, problems, and applications. J Physician Assistant Educ. 1999;10(1):12–6.

Shortell SM, O’Brien JL, Carman JM, Foster RW, Hughes E, Boerstler H, et al. Assessing the impact of continuous quality improvement/total quality management: concept versus implementation. Health Serv Res. 1995;30(2):377.

CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar

Lohr K. Quality of health care: an introduction to critical definitions, concepts, principles, and practicalities. Striving for quality in health care. 1991.

Berwick DM. The clinical process and the quality process. Qual Manage Healthc. 1992;1(1):1–8.

Article CAS Google Scholar

Gift B. On the road to TQM. Food Manage. 1992;27(4):88–9.

CAS PubMed Google Scholar

Greiner A, Knebel E. The core competencies needed for health care professionals. health professions education: A bridge to quality. 2003:45–73.

McCalman J, Bailie R, Bainbridge R, McPhail-Bell K, Percival N, Askew D et al. Continuous quality improvement and comprehensive primary health care: a systems framework to improve service quality and health outcomes. Front Public Health. 2018:6 (76):1–6.

Sheingold BH, Hahn JA. The history of healthcare quality: the first 100 years 1860–1960. Int J Afr Nurs Sci. 2014;1:18–22.

Google Scholar

Donabedian A. Evaluating the quality of medical care. Milbank Q. 1966;44(3):166–206.

Institute of Medicine (US) Committee on Quality of Health Care in America. Crossing the Quality Chasm: A New Health System for the 21st Century. Washington (DC): National Academies Press (US). 2001. 2, Improving the 21st-century Health Care System. Available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK222265/ .

Rubinstein A, Barani M, Lopez AS. Quality first for effective universal health coverage in low-income and middle-income countries. Lancet Global Health. 2018;6(11):e1142–1143.

Article PubMed Google Scholar

Agency for Healthcare Reserach and Quality. Quality Improvement and monitoring at your fingertips USA,: Agency for Healthcare Reserach and Quality. 2022. Available from: https://qualityindicators.ahrq.gov/ .

Anderson CA, Cassidy B, Rivenburgh P. Implementing continuous quality improvement (CQI) in hospitals: lessons learned from the International Quality Study. Qual Assur Health Care. 1991;3(3):141–6.

Gardner K, Mazza D. Quality in general practice - definitions and frameworks. Aust Fam Physician. 2012;41(3):151–4.

PubMed Google Scholar

Loper AC, Jensen TM, Farley AB, Morgan JD, Metz AJ. A systematic review of approaches for continuous quality improvement capacity-building. J Public Health Manage Pract. 2022;28(2):E354.

Hill JE, Stephani A-M, Sapple P, Clegg AJ. The effectiveness of continuous quality improvement for developing professional practice and improving health care outcomes: a systematic review. Implement Sci. 2020;15(1):1–14.

Candas B, Jobin G, Dubé C, Tousignant M, Abdeljelil AB, Grenier S, et al. Barriers and facilitators to implementing continuous quality improvement programs in colonoscopy services: a mixed methods systematic review. Endoscopy Int Open. 2016;4(02):E118–133.

Peters MD, Marnie C, Colquhoun H, Garritty CM, Hempel S, Horsley T, et al. Scoping reviews: reinforcing and advancing the methodology and application. Syst Reviews. 2021;10(1):1–6.

Arksey H, O’Malley L. Scoping studies: towards a methodological framework. Int J Soc Res Methodol. 2005;8(1):19–32.

Tricco AC, Lillie E, Zarin W, O’Brien KK, Colquhoun H, Levac D, et al. PRISMA extension for scoping reviews (PRISMA-ScR): checklist and explanation. Ann Intern Med. 2018;169(7):467–73.

McGowan J, Straus S, Moher D, Langlois EV, O’Brien KK, Horsley T, et al. Reporting scoping reviews—PRISMA ScR extension. J Clin Epidemiol. 2020;123:177–9.

Donabedian A. Explorations in quality assessment and monitoring: the definition of quality and approaches to its assessment. Health Administration Press, Ann Arbor. 1980;1.

World Health Organization. Operational framework for primary health care: transforming vision into action. Geneva: World Health Organization and the United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF); 2020 [updated 14 December 2020; cited 2023 Nov Oct 17]. Available from: https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/9789240017832 .

The Joanna Briggs Institute. The Joanna Briggs Institute Reviewers’ Manual :2014 edition. Australia: The Joanna Briggs Institute. 2014:88–91.

Rihal CS, Kamath CC, Holmes DR Jr, Reller MK, Anderson SS, McMurtry EK, et al. Economic and clinical outcomes of a physician-led continuous quality improvement intervention in the delivery of percutaneous coronary intervention. Am J Manag Care. 2006;12(8):445–52.

Ade-Oshifogun JB, Dufelmeier T. Prevention and Management of Do not return notices: a quality improvement process for Supplemental staffing nursing agencies. Nurs Forum. 2012;47(2):106–12.

Rubenstein L, Khodyakov D, Hempel S, Danz M, Salem-Schatz S, Foy R, et al. How can we recognize continuous quality improvement? Int J Qual Health Care. 2014;26(1):6–15.

O’Neill SM, Hempel S, Lim YW, Danz MS, Foy R, Suttorp MJ, et al. Identifying continuous quality improvement publications: what makes an improvement intervention ‘CQI’? BMJ Qual Saf. 2011;20(12):1011–9.

Article PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar

Sibthorpe B, Gardner K, McAullay D. Furthering the quality agenda in Aboriginal community controlled health services: understanding the relationship between accreditation, continuous quality improvement and national key performance indicator reporting. Aust J Prim Health. 2016;22(4):270–5.

Bennett CL, Crane JM. Quality improvement efforts in oncology: are we ready to begin? Cancer Invest. 2001;19(1):86–95.

VanValkenburgh DA. Implementing continuous quality improvement at the facility level. Adv Ren Replace Ther. 2001;8(2):104–13.

Loper AC, Jensen TM, Farley AB, Morgan JD, Metz AJ. A systematic review of approaches for continuous quality improvement capacity-building. J Public Health Manage Practice. 2022;28(2):E354–361.

Ryan M. Achieving and sustaining quality in healthcare. Front Health Serv Manag. 2004;20(3):3–11.

Nicolucci A, Allotta G, Allegra G, Cordaro G, D’Agati F, Di Benedetto A, et al. Five-year impact of a continuous quality improvement effort implemented by a network of diabetes outpatient clinics. Diabetes Care. 2008;31(1):57–62.

Wakefield BJ, Blegen MA, Uden-Holman T, Vaughn T, Chrischilles E, Wakefield DS. Organizational culture, continuous quality improvement, and medication administration error reporting. Am J Med Qual. 2001;16(4):128–34.

Sori DA, Debelew GT, Degefa LS, Asefa Z. Continuous quality improvement strategy for increasing immediate postpartum long-acting reversible contraceptive use at Jimma University Medical Center, Jimma, Ethiopia. BMJ Open Qual. 2023;12(1):e002051.

Roche B, Robin C, Deleaval PJ, Marti MC. Continuous quality improvement in ambulatory surgery: the non-attending patient. Ambul Surg. 1998;6(2):97–100.

O’Connor JB, Sondhi SS, Mullen KD, McCullough AJ. A continuous quality improvement initiative reduces inappropriate prescribing of prophylactic antibiotics for endoscopic procedures. Am J Gastroenterol. 1999;94(8):2115–21.

Ursu A, Greenberg G, McKee M. Continuous quality improvement methodology: a case study on multidisciplinary collaboration to improve chlamydia screening. Fam Med Community Health. 2019;7(2):e000085.

Quick B, Nordstrom S, Johnson K. Using continuous quality improvement to implement evidence-based medicine. Lippincotts Case Manag. 2006;11(6):305–15 ( quiz 16 – 7 ).

Oyeledun B, Phillips A, Oronsaye F, Alo OD, Shaffer N, Osibo B, et al. The effect of a continuous quality improvement intervention on retention-in-care at 6 months postpartum in a PMTCT Program in Northern Nigeria: results of a cluster randomized controlled study. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr. 2017;75(Suppl 2):S156–164.

Nyengerai T, Phohole M, Iqaba N, Kinge CW, Gori E, Moyo K, et al. Quality of service and continuous quality improvement in voluntary medical male circumcision programme across four provinces in South Africa: longitudinal and cross-sectional programme data. PLoS ONE. 2021;16(8):e0254850.

Article CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar

Wang J, Zhang H, Liu J, Zhang K, Yi B, Liu Y, et al. Implementation of a continuous quality improvement program reduces the occurrence of peritonitis in PD. Ren Fail. 2014;36(7):1029–32.

Stikes R, Barbier D. Applying the plan-do-study-act model to increase the use of kangaroo care. J Nurs Manag. 2013;21(1):70–8.

Wagner AD, Mugo C, Bluemer-Miroite S, Mutiti PM, Wamalwa DC, Bukusi D, et al. Continuous quality improvement intervention for adolescent and young adult HIV testing services in Kenya improves HIV knowledge. AIDS. 2017;31(Suppl 3):S243–252.

Le RD, Melanson SE, Santos KS, Paredes JD, Baum JM, Goonan EM, et al. Using lean principles to optimise inpatient phlebotomy services. J Clin Pathol. 2014;67(8):724–30.

Manyazewal T, Mekonnen A, Demelew T, Mengestu S, Abdu Y, Mammo D, et al. Improving immunization capacity in Ethiopia through continuous quality improvement interventions: a prospective quasi-experimental study. Infect Dis Poverty. 2018;7:7.

Kamiya Y, Ishijma H, Hagiwara A, Takahashi S, Ngonyani HAM, Samky E. Evaluating the impact of continuous quality improvement methods at hospitals in Tanzania: a cluster-randomized trial. Int J Qual Health Care. 2017;29(1):32–9.

Kibbe DC, Bentz E, McLaughlin CP. Continuous quality improvement for continuity of care. J Fam Pract. 1993;36(3):304–8.

Adrawa N, Ongiro S, Lotee K, Seret J, Adeke M, Izudi J. Use of a context-specific package to increase sputum smear monitoring among people with pulmonary tuberculosis in Uganda: a quality improvement study. BMJ Open Qual. 2023;12(3):1–6.

Hunt P, Hunter SB, Levan D. Continuous quality improvement in substance abuse treatment facilities: how much does it cost? J Subst Abuse Treat. 2017;77:133–40.

Azadeh A, Ameli M, Alisoltani N, Motevali Haghighi S. A unique fuzzy multi-control approach for continuous quality improvement in a radio therapy department. Qual Quantity. 2016;50(6):2469–93.

Memiah P, Tlale J, Shimabale M, Nzyoka S, Komba P, Sebeza J, et al. Continuous quality improvement (CQI) institutionalization to reach 95:95:95 HIV targets: a multicountry experience from the Global South. BMC Health Serv Res. 2021;21(1):711.

Yapa HM, De Neve JW, Chetty T, Herbst C, Post FA, Jiamsakul A, et al. The impact of continuous quality improvement on coverage of antenatal HIV care tests in rural South Africa: results of a stepped-wedge cluster-randomised controlled implementation trial. PLoS Med. 2020;17(10):e1003150.

Dadi TL, Abebo TA, Yeshitla A, Abera Y, Tadesse D, Tsegaye S, et al. Impact of quality improvement interventions on facility readiness, quality and uptake of maternal and child health services in developing regions of Ethiopia: a secondary analysis of programme data. BMJ Open Qual. 2023;12(4):e002140.

Weinberg M, Fuentes JM, Ruiz AI, Lozano FW, Angel E, Gaitan H, et al. Reducing infections among women undergoing cesarean section in Colombia by means of continuous quality improvement methods. Arch Intern Med. 2001;161(19):2357–65.

Andreoni V, Bilak Y, Bukumira M, Halfer D, Lynch-Stapleton P, Perez C. Project management: putting continuous quality improvement theory into practice. J Nurs Care Qual. 1995;9(3):29–37.

Balfour ME, Zinn TE, Cason K, Fox J, Morales M, Berdeja C, et al. Provider-payer partnerships as an engine for continuous quality improvement. Psychiatric Serv. 2018;69(6):623–5.

Agurto I, Sandoval J, De La Rosa M, Guardado ME. Improving cervical cancer prevention in a developing country. Int J Qual Health Care. 2006;18(2):81–6.

Anderson CI, Basson MD, Ali M, Davis AT, Osmer RL, McLeod MK, et al. Comprehensive multicenter graduate surgical education initiative incorporating entrustable professional activities, continuous quality improvement cycles, and a web-based platform to enhance teaching and learning. J Am Coll Surg. 2018;227(1):64–76.

Benjamin S, Seaman M. Applying continuous quality improvement and human performance technology to primary health care in Bahrain. Health Care Superv. 1998;17(1):62–71.

Byabagambi J, Marks P, Megere H, Karamagi E, Byakika S, Opio A, et al. Improving the quality of voluntary medical male circumcision through use of the continuous quality improvement approach: a pilot in 30 PEPFAR-Supported sites in Uganda. PLoS ONE. 2015;10(7):e0133369.

Hogg S, Roe Y, Mills R. Implementing evidence-based continuous quality improvement strategies in an urban Aboriginal Community Controlled Health Service in South East Queensland: a best practice implementation pilot. JBI Database Syst Rev Implement Rep. 2017;15(1):178–87.

Hopper MB, Morgan S. Continuous quality improvement initiative for pressure ulcer prevention. J Wound Ostomy Cont Nurs. 2014;41(2):178–80.

Ji J, Jiang DD, Xu Z, Yang YQ, Qian KY, Zhang MX. Continuous quality improvement of nutrition management during radiotherapy in patients with nasopharyngeal carcinoma. Nurs Open. 2021;8(6):3261–70.

Chen M, Deng JH, Zhou FD, Wang M, Wang HY. Improving the management of anemia in hemodialysis patients by implementing the continuous quality improvement program. Blood Purif. 2006;24(3):282–6.

Reeves S, Matney K, Crane V. Continuous quality improvement as an ideal in hospital practice. Health Care Superv. 1995;13(4):1–12.

Barton AJ, Danek G, Johns P, Coons M. Improving patient outcomes through CQI: vascular access planning. J Nurs Care Qual. 1998;13(2):77–85.

Buttigieg SC, Gauci D, Dey P. Continuous quality improvement in a Maltese hospital using logical framework analysis. J Health Organ Manag. 2016;30(7):1026–46.

Take N, Byakika S, Tasei H, Yoshikawa T. The effect of 5S-continuous quality improvement-total quality management approach on staff motivation, patients’ waiting time and patient satisfaction with services at hospitals in Uganda. J Public Health Afr. 2015;6(1):486.

PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar

Jacobson GH, McCoin NS, Lescallette R, Russ S, Slovis CM. Kaizen: a method of process improvement in the emergency department. Acad Emerg Med. 2009;16(12):1341–9.

Agarwal S, Gallo J, Parashar A, Agarwal K, Ellis S, Khot U, et al. Impact of lean six sigma process improvement methodology on cardiac catheterization laboratory efficiency. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2015;85:S119.

Rahul G, Samanta AK, Varaprasad G A Lean Six Sigma approach to reduce overcrowding of patients and improving the discharge process in a super-specialty hospital. In 2020 International Conference on System, Computation, Automation and Networking (ICSCAN) 2020 July 3 (pp. 1-6). IEEE

Patel J, Nattabi B, Long R, Durey A, Naoum S, Kruger E, et al. The 5 C model: A proposed continuous quality improvement framework for volunteer dental services in remote Australian Aboriginal communities. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol. 2023;51(6):1150–8.

Van Acker B, McIntosh G, Gudes M. Continuous quality improvement techniques enhance HMO members’ immunization rates. J Healthc Qual. 1998;20(2):36–41.

Horine PD, Pohjala ED, Luecke RW. Healthcare financial managers and CQI. Healthc Financ Manage. 1993;47(9):34.

Reynolds JL. Reducing the frequency of episiotomies through a continuous quality improvement program. CMAJ. 1995;153(3):275–82.

Bunik M, Galloway K, Maughlin M, Hyman D. First five quality improvement program increases adherence and continuity with well-child care. Pediatr Qual Saf. 2021;6(6):e484.

Boyle TA, MacKinnon NJ, Mahaffey T, Duggan K, Dow N. Challenges of standardized continuous quality improvement programs in community pharmacies: the case of SafetyNET-Rx. Res Social Adm Pharm. 2012;8(6):499–508.

Price A, Schwartz R, Cohen J, Manson H, Scott F. Assessing continuous quality improvement in public health: adapting lessons from healthcare. Healthc Policy. 2017;12(3):34–49.

Gage AD, Gotsadze T, Seid E, Mutasa R, Friedman J. The influence of continuous quality improvement on healthcare quality: a mixed-methods study from Zimbabwe. Soc Sci Med. 2022;298:114831.

Chan YC, Ho SJ. Continuous quality improvement: a survey of American and Canadian healthcare executives. Hosp Health Serv Adm. 1997;42(4):525–44.

Balas EA, Puryear J, Mitchell JA, Barter B. How to structure clinical practice guidelines for continuous quality improvement? J Med Syst. 1994;18(5):289–97.

ElChamaa R, Seely AJE, Jeong D, Kitto S. Barriers and facilitators to the implementation and adoption of a continuous quality improvement program in surgery: a case study. J Contin Educ Health Prof. 2022;42(4):227–35.

Candas B, Jobin G, Dubé C, Tousignant M, Abdeljelil A, Grenier S, et al. Barriers and facilitators to implementing continuous quality improvement programs in colonoscopy services: a mixed methods systematic review. Endoscopy Int Open. 2016;4(2):E118–133.

Brandrud AS, Schreiner A, Hjortdahl P, Helljesen GS, Nyen B, Nelson EC. Three success factors for continual improvement in healthcare: an analysis of the reports of improvement team members. BMJ Qual Saf. 2011;20(3):251–9.

Lee S, Choi KS, Kang HY, Cho W, Chae YM. Assessing the factors influencing continuous quality improvement implementation: experience in Korean hospitals. Int J Qual Health Care. 2002;14(5):383–91.

Horwood C, Butler L, Barker P, Phakathi S, Haskins L, Grant M, et al. A continuous quality improvement intervention to improve the effectiveness of community health workers providing care to mothers and children: a cluster randomised controlled trial in South Africa. Hum Resour Health. 2017;15(1):39.

Hyrkäs K, Lehti K. Continuous quality improvement through team supervision supported by continuous self-monitoring of work and systematic patient feedback. J Nurs Manag. 2003;11(3):177–88.

Akdemir N, Peterson LN, Campbell CM, Scheele F. Evaluation of continuous quality improvement in accreditation for medical education. BMC Med Educ. 2020;20(Suppl 1):308.

Barzansky B, Hunt D, Moineau G, Ahn D, Lai CW, Humphrey H, et al. Continuous quality improvement in an accreditation system for undergraduate medical education: benefits and challenges. Med Teach. 2015;37(11):1032–8.

Gaylis F, Nasseri R, Salmasi A, Anderson C, Mohedin S, Prime R, et al. Implementing continuous quality improvement in an integrated community urology practice: lessons learned. Urology. 2021;153:139–46.

Gaga S, Mqoqi N, Chimatira R, Moko S, Igumbor JO. Continuous quality improvement in HIV and TB services at selected healthcare facilities in South Africa. South Afr J HIV Med. 2021;22(1):1202.

Wang F, Yao D. Application effect of continuous quality improvement measures on patient satisfaction and quality of life in gynecological nursing. Am J Transl Res. 2021;13(6):6391–8.

Lee SB, Lee LL, Yeung RS, Chan J. A continuous quality improvement project to reduce medication error in the emergency department. World J Emerg Med. 2013;4(3):179–82.

Chiang AA, Lee KC, Lee JC, Wei CH. Effectiveness of a continuous quality improvement program aiming to reduce unplanned extubation: a prospective study. Intensive Care Med. 1996;22(11):1269–71.

Chinnaiyan K, Al-Mallah M, Goraya T, Patel S, Kazerooni E, Poopat C, et al. Impact of a continuous quality improvement initiative on appropriate use of coronary CT angiography: results from a multicenter, statewide registry, the advanced cardiovascular imaging consortium (ACIC). J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr. 2011;5(4):S29–30.

Gibson-Helm M, Rumbold A, Teede H, Ranasinha S, Bailie R, Boyle J. A continuous quality improvement initiative: improving the provision of pregnancy care for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander women. BJOG: Int J Obstet Gynecol. 2015;122:400–1.

Bennett IM, Coco A, Anderson J, Horst M, Gambler AS, Barr WB, et al. Improving maternal care with a continuous quality improvement strategy: a report from the interventions to minimize preterm and low birth weight infants through continuous improvement techniques (IMPLICIT) network. J Am Board Fam Med. 2009;22(4):380–6.

Krall SP, Iv CLR, Donahue L. Effect of continuous quality improvement methods on reducing triage to thrombolytic interval for Acute myocardial infarction. Acad Emerg Med. 1995;2(7):603–9.

Swanson TK, Eilers GM. Physician and staff acceptance of continuous quality improvement. Fam Med. 1994;26(9):583–6.

Yu Y, Zhou Y, Wang H, Zhou T, Li Q, Li T, et al. Impact of continuous quality improvement initiatives on clinical outcomes in peritoneal dialysis. Perit Dial Int. 2014;34(Suppl 2):S43–48.

Schiff GD, Goldfield NI. Deming meets Braverman: toward a progressive analysis of the continuous quality improvement paradigm. Int J Health Serv. 1994;24(4):655–73.

American Hospital Association Division of Quality Resources Chicago, IL: The role of hospital leadership in the continuous improvement of patient care quality. American Hospital Association. J Healthc Qual. 1992;14(5):8–14,22.

Scriven M. The Logic and Methodology of checklists [dissertation]. Western Michigan University; 2000.

Hales B, Terblanche M, Fowler R, Sibbald W. Development of medical checklists for improved quality of patient care. Int J Qual Health Care. 2008;20(1):22–30.

Vermeir P, Vandijck D, Degroote S, Peleman R, Verhaeghe R, Mortier E, et al. Communication in healthcare: a narrative review of the literature and practical recommendations. Int J Clin Pract. 2015;69(11):1257–67.

Eljiz K, Greenfield D, Hogden A, Taylor R, Siddiqui N, Agaliotis M, et al. Improving knowledge translation for increased engagement and impact in healthcare. BMJ open Qual. 2020;9(3):e000983.

O’Brien JL, Shortell SM, Hughes EF, Foster RW, Carman JM, Boerstler H, et al. An integrative model for organization-wide quality improvement: lessons from the field. Qual Manage Healthc. 1995;3(4):19–30.

Adily A, Girgis S, D’Este C, Matthews V, Ward JE. Syphilis testing performance in Aboriginal primary health care: exploring impact of continuous quality improvement over time. Aust J Prim Health. 2020;26(2):178–83.

Veillard J, Cowling K, Bitton A, Ratcliffe H, Kimball M, Barkley S, et al. Better measurement for performance improvement in low- and middle-income countries: the primary Health Care Performance Initiative (PHCPI) experience of conceptual framework development and indicator selection. Milbank Q. 2017;95(4):836–83.

Barbazza E, Kringos D, Kruse I, Klazinga NS, Tello JE. Creating performance intelligence for primary health care strengthening in Europe. BMC Health Serv Res. 2019;19(1):1006.

Assefa Y, Hill PS, Gilks CF, Admassu M, Tesfaye D, Van Damme W. Primary health care contributions to universal health coverage. Ethiopia Bull World Health Organ. 2020;98(12):894.

Van Weel C, Kidd MR. Why strengthening primary health care is essential to achieving universal health coverage. CMAJ. 2018;190(15):E463–466.

Download references

Acknowledgements

Not applicable.

The authors received no fund.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

School of Public Health, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia

Aklilu Endalamaw, Resham B Khatri, Tesfaye Setegn Mengistu, Daniel Erku & Yibeltal Assefa

College of Medicine and Health Sciences, Bahir Dar University, Bahir Dar, Ethiopia

Aklilu Endalamaw & Tesfaye Setegn Mengistu

Health Social Science and Development Research Institute, Kathmandu, Nepal

Resham B Khatri

Centre for Applied Health Economics, School of Medicine, Grifth University, Brisbane, Australia

Daniel Erku

Menzies Health Institute Queensland, Grifth University, Brisbane, Australia

International Institute for Primary Health Care in Ethiopia, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia

Eskinder Wolka & Anteneh Zewdie

You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

AE conceptualized the study, developed the first draft of the manuscript, and managing feedbacks from co-authors. YA conceptualized the study, provided feedback, and supervised the whole processes. RBK provided feedback throughout. TSM provided feedback throughout. DE provided feedback throughout. EW provided feedback throughout. AZ provided feedback throughout. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Aklilu Endalamaw .

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate.

Not applicable because this research is based on publicly available articles.

Consent for publication

Competing interests.

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary Information

Supplementary material 1., supplementary material 2., rights and permissions.

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Endalamaw, A., Khatri, R.B., Mengistu, T.S. et al. A scoping review of continuous quality improvement in healthcare system: conceptualization, models and tools, barriers and facilitators, and impact. BMC Health Serv Res 24 , 487 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-024-10828-0

Download citation

Received : 27 December 2023

Accepted : 05 March 2024

Published : 19 April 2024

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-024-10828-0

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

Continuous quality improvement
Quality of Care

BMC Health Services Research

ISSN: 1472-6963

General enquiries: [email protected]

IMAGES

Total Quality Management, (Revised Edition)
[PDF] Total Quality Management by D.R. Kiran eBook
(PDF) Total quality management (TQM) and the importance of the post
FREE 6+ Sample Management Review Templates in PDF
(PDF) Total Quality Management Practices in Food Industry
Report On Total Quality Management

VIDEO

TQM| TOTAL QUALITY MANAGEMENT
L 5 5S,Total Quality Control,TEI I Quality and Reliability Engineering I Mechanical
Total Quality Management [TQM] in Hospitals– Challenges, Barriers and Implementation Developing
CHAPTER 1
Total Quality Management
Total Quality Management

COMMENTS

Total Quality Management: a Literature Review and An Agenda for Future
Total quality management (TQM) is a revolutionary approach to effective management. The research in TQM has emerged from practical needs of organizations embracing this philosophy, and the literature is mostly conceptual and practitioner‐oriented. There is a lack of sound theoretical framework classifying past efforts and guiding future research.
(PDF) Total Quality Management: A Review of Recent Trend
Total Quality Management: A Review of Recent T rend. 1 Djojo Dihardjo and Lena Ellitan, 1 Faculty of Economics and Business, Wijaya Kusuma University, Surabaya, Indonesia. 2 Faculty of Business ...
46908 PDFs
The purpose of this study is to examine the relationships of master production scheduling (MPS), total quality management (TQM), blood production (BP) and blood transfusion sustainability in the ...
(PDF) A systematic literature review of Total Quality Management (TQM
The results found a positive association between total quality management and service quality (p-value < 0.05), underscoring the significance of total quality management principles in improving ...
A literature review on total quality management (models, frameworks
The purpose of this paper is to analyze the evolution of total quality management (TQM) models, frameworks, and tools and techniques in higher education (HE) over the last thirty years from 1991 till 2020, based on a literature review,30 articles from 52 journals were used to perform this detailed literature review.
PDF From total quality management to Quality 4.0: A systematic ...
tionships among Industry 4.0, quality management, and total quality management (TQM). Furthermore, Souza et al. (2022) provided a bibliometric analysis to review the papers related to TQM 4.0, and Baran and Korkusuz Polat (2022) presented a classification of Industry 4.0 studies in terms of TQM.
Total Quality Management
The definition of total quality management is conformance to customer requirements and specifications, fitness for use, buyer satisfaction, and value at an affordable price. The three individuals who have developed the total quality management concepts in the United States are W.E. Deming, J.M. Juran, and Philip Crosby.
PDF Total Quality Management (TQM)
Total quality management (TQM) refers to the continuous, ongoing activity that covers, records, inspects, organizes, and controls all areas of an organization (com-pany, institution, etc.) and serves to introduce quality as a system goal and guaran-teed permanently (Oakland et al. (2020). Total quality management (TQM) is a management strategy ...
Total quality management as competitive advantage: A review and
Total Quality Management (TQM) has become, according to one source, 'as pervasive a part of business thinking as quarterly financial results,' and yet TQM's role as a strategic resource remains virtually unexamined in strategic management research.
A systematic literature review on total quality management critical
Findings. An analysis of the literature identifies three different clusters of papers: "identification" papers, which show that customer focus has gained importance in recent times; "implementation" papers, which highlight that a general or shared model or scale to successfully implement total quality management (TQM) does not yet exist; and "impact-on-performance" papers, which ...
Full article: Emerging research trends of total quality management in
The first ranked document is named 'Total quality management as competitive advantage: A review and empirical study (Powell, Citation 1995), which assessed the performance of TQM on strategic management research and made the appraisal of TQM from resource and other conceptual aspects.
From total quality management to Quality 4.0: A systematic literature
Quality 4.0 is an emerging concept that has been increasingly appreciated because of the intensification of competition, continually changing customer requirements and technological evolution. It deals with aligning quality management practices with the emergent capabilities of Industry 4.0 to improve cost, time, and efficiency and increase product quality. This article aims to comprehensively ...
(PDF) Reviewing the Literature on Total Quality Management and
This paper aims to review the literature of Total Quality Management (TQM) and organizational. performance. Indeed, in any organization, the concept of development is considered to be the. most ...
Full article: Total quality management in the health-care context
Citation 11 Some studies have indicated that an active way of surmounting health-care challenges is through an intervention program that will border on quality management (eg, total quality management [TQM]). Citation 12. TQM is a system implemented by the management of an organization to achieve the satisfaction of customers/patients.
Total Quality Management: a Literature Review and An Agenda for Future
Total quality management (TQM) is a revolutionary approach to effective management. The research in TQM has emerged from practical needs of organizations embracing this philosophy, and the literature is mostly conceptual and practitioner-oriented. There is a lack of sound theoretical framework classifying past efforts and guiding future research.
Total Quality Management Practices' Effects on Quality Performance and
Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 41 ( 2012 ) 273 â€" 280 1877-0428 2012 Published by Elsevier Ltd. Selection and/or peer review under responsibility of The First International Confer ence on Leadership, Technology and Innovation Management doi: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.04.031 International Conference on Leadership, Technology and Innovation Management Total Quality Management ...
Full article: Quality 2030: quality management for the future
6.1. General conclusions. Quality 2030 consists of five collectively designed themes for future QM research and practice: (a) systems perspectives applied, (b) stability in change, (c) models for smart self-organising, (d) integrating sustainable development, and (e) higher purpose as QM booster.
PDF Chapter 2 Concept of Total Quality Management
2.1 Introduction. This chapter focuses on the identification of the concept of TQM on the basis of the literature review. Section 2.2 presents the concept of TQM from quality gurus. Section 2.3 describes the three well recognized quality award models. Section 2.4 discusses the TQM concept from a number of researchers in the field of TQM.
(PDF) The State of Total Quality Management: a review
Abstract. As quality is seen as becoming a competitive mandate, many organizations are said to be embracing the practice of total quality management (TQM) as an improvement strategy. In this paper ...
PDF Review on Total Quality Management in Pharmaceutical Industries
www.wjpps.com │ Vol 11, Issue 12, 2022.│ ISO 9001:2015 Certified Journal │ 223 Das et al. World Journal of Pharmacy and Pharmaceutical Sciences sigma in a pharmaceutical industry. For a success of exceptional product with minimized value.[18] To understand the six sigma for basic learners, it could be best understand with the
(PDF) Reviewing the Literature on Total Quality Management and
This study came to examine the impact of Total Quality management (TQM) as instrument in achieving on the organisational performance. TQM is defined as a policy that essentially aimed at establish and deliver high quality products and services that cover all their client's demands and achieve a high level of customer satisfaction.
(PDF) TOTAL QUALITY MANAGEMENT
Introduction. This paper is to provide a general understanding of Total Quality Management, a concept that is. aimed at ensuring quality with continuous improvement. It takes Oakland's "Total ...
A scoping review of continuous quality improvement in healthcare system
The growing adoption of continuous quality improvement (CQI) initiatives in healthcare has generated a surge in research interest to gain a deeper understanding of CQI. However, comprehensive evidence regarding the diverse facets of CQI in healthcare has been limited. Our review sought to comprehensively grasp the conceptualization and principles of CQI, explore existing models and tools ...
(PDF) Total quality management
Total Quality Management is an organization approach that. began in the 1950s. [1] and has consistently turned out to be. better known following the mid 1980s. Generally the term. 'Quality' is ...

To read this content please select one of the options below:

Design/methodology/approach

Research limitations/implications

Practical implications

Originality/value

Related articles

All feedback is valuable

Join us on our journey

Questions & More Information

From total quality management to Quality 4.0: A systematic literature review and future research agenda

Cite this article

Article PDF

Similar content being viewed by others

Customer experience: fundamental premises and implications for research

The customer value proposition: evolution, development, and application in marketing

Customer engagement in social media: a framework and meta-analysis

Author information

Corresponding author

Additional information

Rights and permissions

About this article

Share this article

Reviewing the Literature on Total Quality Management and Organizational Performance

Related Papers

RELATED PAPERS

A scoping review of continuous quality improvement in healthcare system: conceptualization, models and tools, barriers and facilitators, and impact

Conclusions

Protocol registration and results reporting

Defining the research problems

Information source and search strategy

Eligibility criteria and article selection

Data extraction and data items

Summarizing and reporting the results

Search results

Operationalizing continuous quality improvement

Continuous quality improvement models and tools

Barriers and facilitators of continuous quality improvement implementation

Impact of continuous quality improvement

Structure components

Process and output components

Service delivery

Coordination and collaboration

Patient satisfaction

Continuity of care

Accessibility

Timely access

Acceptability

Outcome components

Limitations

Availability of data and materials

Acknowledgements

Author information

Contributions

Corresponding author

Ethics declarations

Consent for publication

Additional information

Supplementary Information

About this article

Share this article

BMC Health Services Research

IMAGES

VIDEO

COMMENTS