Literature DB >> 15751567

Morbidity and mortality audits: "How to"for family practice.

Mark J Yaffe1, Geeta Gupta, Susan Still, Miriam Boillat, Balbina Russillo, Benjamin Schiff, Donald Sproule.   

Abstract

PROBLEM BEING ADDRESSED: While professions hold their members responsible for self-regulation, many physicians have insufficient information about outcome measures in their practices to judge performance and are inexperienced in performing audits to gather the information they need to judge performance. OBJECTIVE OF PROGRAM: To develop a structure and process to support family doctors with little experience in doing quality improvement studies to conduct morbidity and mortality (M&M) audits. PROGRAM DESCRIPTION: A family medicine teaching group provides members on a rotating basis to an M&M review committee. The committee meets eight times a year and has done four audits, the most comprehensive on the topic of preventable hospital admissions. Both implicit and explicit criteria were incorporated into decision making. Strengths and limitations of the audit process and practice changes that resulted from the audit are discussed.
CONCLUSION: Morbidity and mortality audits can vary in rigour. To promote physicians' interest in and commitment to audits, factors considered should reflect the goals, needs, skills, and time available of the physicians involved. Practical learning often results from simple projects.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 15751567      PMCID: PMC1472972     

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Can Fam Physician        ISSN: 0008-350X            Impact factor:   3.275


  24 in total

Review 1.  Reviewing audit: barriers and facilitating factors for effective clinical audit.

Authors:  G Johnston; I K Crombie; H T Davies; E M Alder; A Millard
Journal:  Qual Health Care       Date:  2000-03

2.  Audit in general practice: how much and how complete? Frequency of audit in general practice.

Authors:  P Dean; R K McKinley; A Farooqi
Journal:  Scand J Prim Health Care       Date:  2001-06       Impact factor: 2.581

Review 3.  Research methods used in developing and applying quality indicators in primary care.

Authors:  S M Campbell; J Braspenning; A Hutchinson; M N Marshall
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2003-04-12

Review 4.  MAAGs (Medical Audit Advisory Groups): the Eli Lilly National Clinical Audit Centre.

Authors:  R Baker; R Fraser
Journal:  Int J Health Care Qual Assur       Date:  1993

5.  Practice activity analysis.

Authors:  D L Crombie; D M Fleming
Journal:  J R Coll Gen Pract Occas Pap       Date:  1988-12

6.  Improving the quality of medical care: building bridges among professional pride, payer profit, and patient satisfaction.

Authors:  R Grol
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2001-11-28       Impact factor: 56.272

7.  Peer review in ambulatory care: use of explicit criteria and implicit judgments.

Authors:  B S Hulka; F J Romm; G R Parkerson; I T Russell; N E Clapp; F S Johnson
Journal:  Med Care       Date:  1979-03       Impact factor: 2.983

8.  Evaluation of death registers in general practice.

Authors:  R Stacy; L Robinson; R Bhopal; J Spencer
Journal:  Br J Gen Pract       Date:  1998-11       Impact factor: 5.386

9.  Dissemination of discharge summaries. Not reaching follow-up physicians.

Authors:  Carl van Walraven; Ratika Seth; Andreas Laupacis
Journal:  Can Fam Physician       Date:  2002-04       Impact factor: 3.275

10.  Medical professionalism in the new millennium: a physician charter.

Authors: 
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  2002-02-05       Impact factor: 25.391

View more
  1 in total

1.  Medical mortality in an emergency department in Nigeria: the transition is obvious!

Authors:  A D Olusegun-Joseph; O Akande; E Otrofanowei; E O Nwoye; O B Olopade; J N Ajuluchukwu
Journal:  Afr Health Sci       Date:  2021-03       Impact factor: 0.927

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.