Krieg M M, Mason P, Hemann R A, Alsip J, Kresowik T
University of Iowa College of Medicine, Iowa City, USA.
Clin Perform Qual Health Care. 1996 Apr-Jun;4(2):86-9.
To compare the effects of feedback methods on the type and frequency of responses received after dissemination of Cooperative Cardiovascular Project data.
Feedback visits were conducted throughout Iowa by means of two approaches; in-person (on-site) visits and telephone conference calls. The content of the presentations was the same for both approaches. This study examined the efficacy of the feedback methods used as determined by the response rates of facilities. A standardized questionnaire was requested from each facility to document the types of action taken by the facilities as a result of the presentations. The Cooperative Cardiovascular Project data were presented to 106 Iowa facilities. On-site presentations were held at 56 facilities; telephone conferences were held with 50 facilities.
Facilities that were visited on-site responded with definite quality improvement plans more frequently than did facilities that participated in telephone conferences. Improvement plans were received from 36 of the 56 facilities (64%) visited on-site and from 20 of the 50 facilities (40%) participating in telephone conferences.
On-site visits appeared to be more effective than telephone conferences in promoting quality improvement efforts through facility-specific feedback presentations.
比较反馈方法对合作心血管项目数据传播后所收到回应的类型和频率的影响。
通过两种方式在爱荷华州各地进行反馈访问；面对面（现场）访问和电话会议。两种方式的演示内容相同。本研究根据机构的回应率来检验所使用反馈方法的效果。要求每个机构提供一份标准化问卷，以记录机构因演示而采取的行动类型。合作心血管项目数据已提交给爱荷华州的106个机构。在56个机构进行了现场演示；与50个机构举行了电话会议。
接受现场访问的机构比参加电话会议的机构更频繁地回应明确的质量改进计划。在接受现场访问的56个机构中有36个（64%）收到了改进计划，在参加电话会议的50个机构中有20个（40%）收到了改进计划。
通过针对特定机构的反馈演示，现场访问在促进质量改进工作方面似乎比电话会议更有效。
