Literature DB >> 34229678

The impact of audit and feedback to support change behaviour in healthcare organisations - a cross-sectional qualitative study of primary care centre managers.

Anna H Glenngård1, Anders Anell2.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: This article addresses the role of audit and feedback (A&F) to support change behaviour and quality improvement work in healthcare organisations. It contributes to the sparse literature on primary care centre (PCC) managers´ views on A&F practices, taking into account the broad scope of primary care. The purpose was to explore if and how different types of A&F support change behaviour by influencing different forms of motivation and learning, and what contextual facilitators and barriers enable or obstruct change behaviour in primary care.
METHODS: A qualitative research approach was used. We explored views about the impact of A&F across managers of 27 PCCs, in five Swedish regions, through semi-structured interviews. A purposeful sampling was used to identify both regions and PCC managers, in order to explore multiple perspectives. We used the COM-B framework, which describes how Capability, Opportunity and Motivation interact and generate change behaviour and how different factors might act as facilitators or barriers, when collecting and analysing data.
RESULTS: Existing forms of A&F were perceived as coercive top-down interventions to secure adherence to contractual obligations, financial targets and clinical guidelines. Support to bottom-up approaches and more complex change at team and organisational levels was perceived as limited. We identified five contextual factors that matter for the impact of A&F on change behaviour and quality improvement work: performance of organisations, continuity in staff, size of organisations, flexibility in leadership and management, and flexibility offered by the external environment.
CONCLUSIONS: External A&F, perceived as coercive by recipients of feedback, can have an impact on change behaviour through 'know-what' and 'know-why' types of knowledge and 'have-to' commitment but provide limited support to complex change. 'Want-to' commitment and bottom-up driven processes are important for more complex change. Similar to previous research, identified facilitators and barriers of change consisted of factors that are difficult to influence by A&F activities. Future research is needed on how to ensure co-development of A&F models that are perceived as legitimate by health care professionals and useful to support more complex change.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Audit and feedback; COM-B; Capability; Change behaviour; Motivation; Opportunity; Primary care

Year:  2021        PMID: 34229678     DOI: 10.1186/s12913-021-06645-4

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  BMC Health Serv Res        ISSN: 1472-6963            Impact factor:   2.655


  14 in total

1.  Reporting and design elements of audit and feedback interventions: a secondary review.

Authors:  Heather Colquhoun; Susan Michie; Anne Sales; Noah Ivers; J M Grimshaw; Kelly Carroll; Mathieu Chalifoux; Kevin Eva; Jamie Brehaut
Journal:  BMJ Qual Saf       Date:  2016-01-25       Impact factor: 7.035

2.  Interdisciplinary versus multidisciplinary care teams: do we understand the difference?

Authors:  Rebecca L Jessup
Journal:  Aust Health Rev       Date:  2007-08       Impact factor: 1.990

3.  Practice Feedback Interventions: 15 Suggestions for Optimizing Effectiveness.

Authors:  Jamie C Brehaut; Heather L Colquhoun; Kevin W Eva; Kelly Carroll; Anne Sales; Susan Michie; Noah Ivers; Jeremy M Grimshaw
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  2016-02-23       Impact factor: 25.391

4.  Understanding innovators' experiences of barriers and facilitators in implementation and diffusion of healthcare service innovations: a qualitative study.

Authors:  Julie Barnett; Konstantina Vasileiou; Fayika Djemil; Laurence Brooks; Terry Young
Journal:  BMC Health Serv Res       Date:  2011-12-16       Impact factor: 2.655

5.  How does audit and feedback influence intentions of health professionals to improve practice? A laboratory experiment and field study in cardiac rehabilitation.

Authors:  Wouter T Gude; Mariëtte M van Engen-Verheul; Sabine N van der Veer; Nicolette F de Keizer; Niels Peek
Journal:  BMJ Qual Saf       Date:  2016-04-11       Impact factor: 7.035

Review 6.  The behaviour change wheel: a new method for characterising and designing behaviour change interventions.

Authors:  Susan Michie; Maartje M van Stralen; Robert West
Journal:  Implement Sci       Date:  2011-04-23       Impact factor: 7.327

7.  Local politico-administrative perspectives on quality improvement based on national registry data in Sweden: a qualitative study using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research.

Authors:  Mio Fredriksson; Ann Catrine Eldh; Sofie Vengberg; Tobias Dahlström; Christina Halford; Lars Wallin; Ulrika Winblad
Journal:  Implement Sci       Date:  2014-12-28       Impact factor: 7.327

8.  A theory of organizational readiness for change.

Authors:  Bryan J Weiner
Journal:  Implement Sci       Date:  2009-10-19       Impact factor: 7.327

Review 9.  A systematic review of the use of theory in randomized controlled trials of audit and feedback.

Authors:  Heather L Colquhoun; Jamie C Brehaut; Anne Sales; Noah Ivers; Jeremy Grimshaw; Susan Michie; Kelly Carroll; Mathieu Chalifoux; Kevin W Eva
Journal:  Implement Sci       Date:  2013-06-10       Impact factor: 7.327

10.  Health professionals' perceptions about their clinical performance and the influence of audit and feedback on their intentions to improve practice: a theory-based study in Dutch intensive care units.

Authors:  Wouter T Gude; Marie-José Roos-Blom; Sabine N van der Veer; Dave A Dongelmans; Evert de Jonge; Jill J Francis; Niels Peek; Nicolette F de Keizer
Journal:  Implement Sci       Date:  2018-02-17       Impact factor: 7.327

View more
  1 in total

Review 1.  [Effects of statutory quality assurance in acute inpatient care].

Authors:  Max Geraedts; Werner de Cruppé
Journal:  Bundesgesundheitsblatt Gesundheitsforschung Gesundheitsschutz       Date:  2022-02-04       Impact factor: 1.513

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.