Literature DB >> 17207006

Quality improvement: the divergent views of managers and clinicians.

Michelle Price1, Les Fitzgerald, Leigh Kinsman.   

Abstract

AIM: The aim of this study was to identify and explore nurse managers' and clinical nurses' perceptions of quality improvement as related to their practice.
BACKGROUND: The quality improvement process has become an integral component of health care service delivery. The pivotal role that nurse managers and clinical nurses play in the success of quality improvement initiatives is consistently reported throughout the literature. Published evidence has primarily focused on nurses' perceptions of "quality" and the importance of the nurse's role. However, the literature fails to provide evidence that nurse managers and clinical nurses agree with this.
METHOD: Research was conducted at one large regional hospital in Australia in the year 2000 and used a descriptive qualitative research methodology. Data were collected using semistructured interviews with six nurse managers and six clinical nurses on two consecutive occasions and analysed using constant comparative analysis.
RESULTS: Nurse managers' and clinical nurses' understanding of the concept of quality improvement and how it applies to the practice of nursing differed. Each group identified that quality improvement can be beneficial to nursing practice, but blamed each other for potential benefits not being realized. Both nurse managers and clinical nurses offered similar solutions with varied emphasis on how quality improvement could improve nursing practice and patient outcomes.
CONCLUSION: The quality improvement process requires review. Nurse managers and clinical nurses offered divergent views of the identified deficiencies in the way quality improvement is implemented that reduce its clinical impact. Integral to the success of any quality improvement process is the inclusion of views of both nurse managers and clinical nurses.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17207006     DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2934.2006.00664.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Nurs Manag        ISSN: 0966-0429            Impact factor:   3.325


  6 in total

1.  Contextual factors that influence quality improvement implementation in primary care: The role of organizations, teams, and individuals.

Authors:  Christopher M Shea; Kea Turner; Jordan Albritton; Kristin L Reiter
Journal:  Health Care Manage Rev       Date:  2018 Jul/Sep

2.  Staff perception of relative importance of quality dimensions for patients at tertiary public services in oman.

Authors:  Ismail Alrashdi; Ahmed Al Qasmi
Journal:  Oman Med J       Date:  2012-09

Review 3.  What is the value and impact of quality and safety teams? A scoping review.

Authors:  Deborah E White; Sharon E Straus; H Tom Stelfox; Jayna M Holroyd-Leduc; Chaim M Bell; Karen Jackson; Jill M Norris; W Ward Flemons; Michael E Moffatt; Alan J Forster
Journal:  Implement Sci       Date:  2011-08-23       Impact factor: 7.327

4.  Facilitators for using data from a quality registry in local quality improvement work: a cross-sectional survey of the Danish Cardiac Rehabilitation Database.

Authors:  Cecilie Lindström Egholm; Charlotte Helmark; Jan Christensen; Ann Catrine Eldh; Ulrika Winblad; Gitte Bunkenborg; Ann-Dorthe Zwisler; Per Nilsen
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2019-06-12       Impact factor: 2.692

5.  Initiating Aha moments when implementing person-centered care in nursing homes: a multi-arm, pre-post intervention.

Authors:  Laci J Cornelison; Linda Hermer; Maggie L Syme; Gayle Doll
Journal:  BMC Geriatr       Date:  2019-04-23       Impact factor: 3.921

6.  Healthcare Quality Improvement and 'work engagement'; concluding results from a national, longitudinal, cross-sectional study of the 'Productive Ward-Releasing Time to Care' Programme.

Authors:  Mark White; Tony Butterworth; John Sg Wells
Journal:  BMC Health Serv Res       Date:  2017-08-01       Impact factor: 2.655

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.