Literature DB >> 7492425

Implementation of quality assurance and medical audit: general practitioners' perceived obstacles and requirements.

R Grol1, M Wensing.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The introduction of quality assurance and medical audit has been an important development in general practice. However, the introduction of such programmes does not necessarily mean they are implemented by general practitioners. AIM: A study was undertaken to describe the problems and requirements perceived by general practitioners in relation to the implementation of quality assurance and medical audit in general practice.
METHOD: Interviews were carried out with a stratified sample of 120 Dutch general practitioners. Knowledge, acceptance and application of quality assurance and medical audit activities were investigated, and perceived problems and requirements in implementing quality assurance and audit activities were explored.
RESULTS: General practitioners in the Netherlands were generally positive towards quality assurance activities, but had little experience of carrying out such activities. The most frequently mentioned obstacles to implementing quality assurance activities concerned lack of time, colleagues' negative attitudes and fear of assessment and criticism by colleagues. Requirements for implementing quality assurance included having regular meetings with colleagues about quality assurance, having information on the aims and methods of quality assurance, having data from other practices with which to compare performance, having support in data collection, in audit in the practice and in setting up local peer review, and having financial support. The most important factor predicting the actual application of quality assurance activities was found to be knowledge of specific quality assurance activities.
CONCLUSION: Well-designed programmes for the implementation of quality assurance and medical audit, using a variety of different interventions, have to be developed. Such programmes should include the training of professionals in the concepts and methods of quality assurance as well as the provision of financial support for quality assurance activities.

Mesh:

Year:  1995        PMID: 7492425      PMCID: PMC1239407     

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Br J Gen Pract        ISSN: 0960-1643            Impact factor:   5.386


  10 in total

1.  National standard setting for quality of care in general practice: attitudes of general practitioners and response to a set of standards.

Authors:  R Grol
Journal:  Br J Gen Pract       Date:  1990-09       Impact factor: 5.386

2.  Quality improvement by peer review in primary care: a practical guide.

Authors:  R Grol
Journal:  Qual Health Care       Date:  1994-09

3.  Educational potential of medical audit: observations from a study of small groups setting standards.

Authors:  J Newton; A Hutchinson; N Steen; I Russell; E Haimes
Journal:  Qual Health Care       Date:  1992-12

Review 4.  Implementing guidelines in general practice care.

Authors:  R Grol
Journal:  Qual Health Care       Date:  1992-09

5.  Survey of general practice audit in Leeds.

Authors:  S J Webb; A C Dowell; P Heywood
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1991-02-16

6.  Peer review in primary care.

Authors:  R Grol
Journal:  Qual Assur Health Care       Date:  1990

7.  Are general practitioners in favour of quality assurance?

Authors:  I D Steven; N A Andersen; A J Esterman
Journal:  Aust Fam Physician       Date:  1989-03

8.  Audit: teaching medical students in general practice.

Authors:  J M Morrison; F M Sullivan
Journal:  Med Educ       Date:  1993-11       Impact factor: 6.251

9.  Obstacles to medical audit: British doctors speak.

Authors:  N Black; E Thompson
Journal:  Soc Sci Med       Date:  1993-04       Impact factor: 4.634

Review 10.  Single and combined strategies for implementing changes in primary care: a literature review.

Authors:  M Wensing; R Grol
Journal:  Int J Qual Health Care       Date:  1994-06       Impact factor: 2.038

  10 in total
  10 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.  Research and development in quality of care: establishing the research agenda.

Authors:  R Grol
Journal:  Qual Health Care       Date:  1996-12

3.  Improving care at the primary-secondary care interface: a difficult but essential task.

Authors:  J Szecsenyi
Journal:  Qual Health Care       Date:  1996-12

4.  Quality improvement: an international commodity?

Authors:  R Grol
Journal:  Qual Health Care       Date:  1996-03

5.  Guideline for Care of Patients With the Diagnoses of Craniosynostosis: Working Group on Craniosynostosis.

Authors:  Irene M J Mathijssen
Journal:  J Craniofac Surg       Date:  2015-09       Impact factor: 1.046

Review 6.  Implementing quality measures for inflammatory bowel disease.

Authors:  Shahzad Ahmed; Corey A Siegel; Gil Y Melmed
Journal:  Curr Gastroenterol Rep       Date:  2015-04

7.  What can patients do to improve health care?

Authors:  Michel Wensing; Richard Grol
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  1998-06       Impact factor: 3.377

8.  The use of quality circles as a support tool in the taking over of practices by young general practitioners.

Authors:  Norbert Král; Bohumil Seifert; Jan Kovář; Cyril Mucha; Jana Vojtíšková; Jáchym Bednár; Seifert Martin
Journal:  J Family Med Prim Care       Date:  2018 Jan-Feb

9.  Term perinatal mortality audit in the Netherlands 2010-2012: a population-based cohort study.

Authors:  Martine Eskes; Adja J M Waelput; Jan Jaap H M Erwich; Hens A A Brouwers; Anita C J Ravelli; Peter W Achterberg; Hans J M W M Merkus; Hein W Bruinse
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2014-10-14       Impact factor: 2.692

10.  The Reasons behind the (Non)Use of Feedback Reports for Quality Improvement in Physical Therapy: A Mixed-Method Study.

Authors:  Marijn Scholte; Catherina W M Neeleman-van der Steen; Philip J van der Wees; Maria W G Nijhuis-van der Sanden; Jozé Braspenning
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2016-08-12       Impact factor: 3.240

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.