衡量新西兰临床治理发展的进展：2010年和2012年资深医生的看法。
Measuring progress with clinical governance development in New Zealand: perceptions of senior doctors in 2010 and 2012.
作者信息
Gauld Robin, Horsburgh Simon
出版信息
BMC Health Serv Res. 2014 Nov 4;14:547. doi: 10.1186/s12913-014-0547-8.
BACKGROUND
Clinical governance has become a core component of health policy and services management in many countries in recent years. Yet tools for measuring its development are limited. We therefore created the Clinical Governance Development Index (CGDI), aimed to measure implementation of expressed government policy in New Zealand.
METHODS
We developed a survey which was distributed in 2010 and again in 2012 to senior doctors employed in public hospitals. Responses to six survey items were weighted and combined to form the CGDI. Final scores for each of New Zealand's District Health Boards (DHBs) were calculated to compare performances between them as well as over time between the two surveys.
RESULTS
New Zealand's overall performance in developing clinical governance improved between the two studies from 46% in 2010 to 54% in 2012 with marked differences by DHB. Statistically significant shifts in performance were evident on all but one CGDI item.
CONCLUSIONS
The CGDI is a simple yet effective method which probes aspects of organisational commitment to clinical governance, respondent participation in organisational design, quality improvement, and teamwork. It could be adapted for use in other health systems.
背景
近年来，临床治理已成为许多国家卫生政策和服务管理的核心组成部分。然而，衡量其发展的工具却很有限。因此，我们创建了临床治理发展指数（CGDI），旨在衡量新西兰政府既定政策的实施情况。
方法
我们开展了一项调查，于2010年进行了分发，并于2012年再次分发给受雇于公立医院的资深医生。对六个调查项目的回答进行加权并合并，以形成CGDI。计算了新西兰每个地区卫生委员会（DHBs）的最终得分，以比较它们之间的表现以及两次调查之间随时间的变化情况。
结果
在这两项研究期间，新西兰在临床治理发展方面的整体表现从2010年的46%提高到了2012年的54%，各地区卫生委员会之间存在显著差异。除一项CGDI项目外，其他所有项目的表现均出现了具有统计学意义的变化。
结论
CGDI是一种简单而有效的方法，可探究组织对临床治理的承诺、受访者对组织设计的参与、质量改进和团队合作等方面。它可进行调整以适用于其他卫生系统。
Zotero 插件