Literature DB >> 11892827

Use of clinical audit for revalidation: is it sufficiently accurate?

R S Jutley1, A McKinley, M Hobeldin, A Mohamed, G G Youngson.   

Abstract

In order to provide better patient care, clinicians will be subject to revalidation and re-certification. This may be partially based on existing and ongoing data collection, yet many units fail to incorporate mechanisms that validate the data that may be used. The accuracy of audit data was evaluated in a unit that has been using commercially available audit software for over 10 years. A total of 655 consecutive surgical admissions were documented over a 6-month period and errors in data collection and entry were gathered and analyzed. An overall accuracy of 90.5% was confirmed but examination of the data found them to be open to misinterpretation. Moreover, 13% of errors were made during a single week when locum staff were involved. The study highlights the fallibility of data collection during audit, and urges caution if using such data when judging performance-related issues as part of the process of appraisal.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2001        PMID: 11892827     DOI: 10.1046/j.1440-1762.2001.00414.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Qual Clin Pract        ISSN: 1320-5455


  2 in total

1.  Variations in clinical audit collection: a survey of plastic surgery units across the British Isles.

Authors:  Jon M Simmons; Paolo Matteucci; Jorge Leon-Villapalos; Patrick L Mallucci; Simon J Withey; Peter E M Butler
Journal:  Ann R Coll Surg Engl       Date:  2006-03       Impact factor: 1.891

2.  Automatic classification of foot examination findings using clinical notes and machine learning.

Authors:  Serguei V S Pakhomov; Penny L Hanson; Susan S Bjornsen; Steven A Smith
Journal:  J Am Med Inform Assoc       Date:  2007-12-20       Impact factor: 4.497

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.