• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

如何使反馈更有效?内镜医师审核反馈报告试点测试的定性发现。

How to Make Feedback More Effective? Qualitative Findings from Pilot Testing of an Audit and Feedback Report for Endoscopists.

机构信息

Department of Health Policy, Management and Evaluation, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada; Dalla Lana School of Public Health, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.

Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, ON, Canada.

出版信息

Can J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2016;2016:4983790. doi: 10.1155/2016/4983790. Epub 2016 Sep 18.

DOI:10.1155/2016/4983790
PMID:27722149
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5045985/
Abstract

. Audit and feedback (A/F) reports are one of the few knowledge translation activities that can effect change in physician behavior. In this study, we pilot-tested an endoscopist A/F report to elicit opinions about the proposed report's usability, acceptability and usefulness, and implications for knowledge translation. . Semi-structured qualitative interviews were conducted with eleven endoscopists in Ontario, Canada. We tested an A/F report template comprising 9 validated, accepted colonoscopy quality indicators populated with simulated data. Interview transcripts were coded using techniques such as constant comparison and themes were identified inductively over several team meetings. . Four interrelated themes were identified: (1) overall perceptions of the A/F report; (2) accountability and consequences for poor performance; (3) motivation to change/improve skills; and (4) training for performance enhancement and available resources. The A/F report was well received; however, participants cited some possible threats to the report's effectiveness including the perceived threat of loss of privileges or licensing and the potential for the data to be dismissed. . Participants agreed that A/F has the potential to improve colonoscopy performance. However, in order to be effective in changing physician behavior, A/F must be thoughtfully implemented with attention to the potential concerns of its recipients.

摘要

. 审核与反馈(A/F)报告是为数不多的能够改变医生行为的知识转化活动之一。在这项研究中,我们对内镜医师的 A/F 报告进行了试点测试,以征求对拟议报告的可用性、可接受性和有用性的意见,以及对知识转化的影响。. 在加拿大安大略省,我们对 11 名内镜医师进行了半结构化的定性访谈。我们测试了一个 A/F 报告模板,其中包含 9 个经过验证和接受的结肠镜检查质量指标,并使用模拟数据填充。使用诸如不断比较等技术对访谈记录进行编码,并在多次团队会议上进行归纳,以确定主题。. 确定了四个相互关联的主题:(1)对 A/F 报告的总体看法;(2)对绩效不佳的问责制和后果;(3)改变/提高技能的动机;以及(4)绩效提升培训和可用资源。A/F 报告受到了好评;然而,参与者指出了该报告可能存在一些有效性威胁,包括失去特权或执照的潜在威胁,以及数据可能被驳回的潜在威胁。. 参与者一致认为,A/F 有可能提高结肠镜检查的性能。然而,为了有效地改变医生的行为,A/F 必须经过深思熟虑的实施,要注意其接受者的潜在关注。

相似文献

1
How to Make Feedback More Effective? Qualitative Findings from Pilot Testing of an Audit and Feedback Report for Endoscopists.如何使反馈更有效?内镜医师审核反馈报告试点测试的定性发现。
Can J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2016;2016:4983790. doi: 10.1155/2016/4983790. Epub 2016 Sep 18.
2
Audit and feedback interventions to improve endoscopist performance: Principles and effectiveness.提高内镜医师操作水平的审核与反馈干预措施:原则与效果
Best Pract Res Clin Gastroenterol. 2016 Jun;30(3):473-85. doi: 10.1016/j.bpg.2016.04.002. Epub 2016 Apr 16.
3
Measurement without management: qualitative evaluation of a voluntary audit & feedback intervention for primary care teams.无管理的测量:对初级保健团队的自愿审核和反馈干预的定性评估。
BMC Health Serv Res. 2019 Jun 24;19(1):419. doi: 10.1186/s12913-019-4226-7.
4
A Pragmatic Randomized Controlled Trial of an Endoscopist Audit and Feedback Report for Colonoscopy.内镜医师审核和反馈报告在结肠镜检查中的实用性随机对照试验
Am J Gastroenterol. 2021 Oct 1;116(10):2042-2051. doi: 10.14309/ajg.0000000000001498.
5
Beyond quality improvement: exploring why primary care teams engage in a voluntary audit and feedback program.超越质量改进:探究基层医疗团队参与自愿审核与反馈项目的原因。
BMC Health Serv Res. 2017 Dec 2;17(1):803. doi: 10.1186/s12913-017-2765-3.
6
Use of a maternal newborn audit and feedback system in Ontario: a collective case study.安大略省使用母婴审计和反馈系统:一项集体案例研究。
BMJ Qual Saf. 2019 Aug;28(8):635-644. doi: 10.1136/bmjqs-2018-008354. Epub 2019 Feb 16.
7
A qualitative study of the variable effects of audit and feedback in the ICU.对重症监护病房中审核与反馈的可变效应的定性研究。
BMJ Qual Saf. 2015 Jun;24(6):393-9. doi: 10.1136/bmjqs-2015-003978. Epub 2015 Apr 27.
8
Colonoscopy audit over 10 years--what can be learnt?十年的结肠镜检查审计——能学到什么?
N Z Med J. 2013 Sep 13;126(1382):25-35.
9
"My approach to this job is...one person at a time": Perceived discordance between population-level quality targets and patient-centred care.“我对这项工作的方法是……一次关注一个人”:人口层面质量目标与以患者为中心的护理之间的感知不一致。
Can Fam Physician. 2014 Mar;60(3):258-66.
10
Characterizing the Gaps Between Best-Practice Implementation Strategies and Real-world Implementation: Qualitative Study Among Family Physicians Who Engaged With Audit and Feedback Reports.剖析最佳实践实施策略与实际实施之间的差距:针对参与审核与反馈报告的家庭医生开展的定性研究
JMIR Hum Factors. 2023 Jan 6;10:e38736. doi: 10.2196/38736.

引用本文的文献

1
An exploration into physician and surgeon data sensemaking: a qualitative systematic review using thematic synthesis.探索医师和外科医生的数据理解:使用主题综合的定性系统评价。
BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2022 Sep 28;22(1):256. doi: 10.1186/s12911-022-01997-1.
2
How well do critical care audit and feedback interventions adhere to best practice? Development and application of the REFLECT-52 evaluation tool.重症监护审核和反馈干预措施在多大程度上符合最佳实践?REFLECT-52 评估工具的制定和应用。
Implement Sci. 2021 Aug 17;16(1):81. doi: 10.1186/s13012-021-01145-9.
3
Colonoscopy quality in community hospitals and nonhospital facilities in Korea.韩国社区医院和非医院医疗机构的结肠镜检查质量。
Korean J Intern Med. 2021 Mar;36(Suppl 1):S35-S43. doi: 10.3904/kjim.2019.117. Epub 2020 May 12.

本文引用的文献

1
The ethics of future trials: qualitative analysis of physicians' decision making.未来试验的伦理:医生决策的定性分析
Trials. 2016 Jan 6;17:12. doi: 10.1186/s13063-015-1137-8.
2
Colonoscopy quality assurance in Ontario: Systematic review and clinical practice guideline.安大略省结肠镜检查质量保证:系统评价和临床实践指南。
Can J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2014 May;28(5):251-74. doi: 10.1155/2014/262816.
3
No more 'business as usual' with audit and feedback interventions: towards an agenda for a reinvigorated intervention.不再“按部就班”:走向振兴干预议程的审计和反馈干预。
Implement Sci. 2014 Jan 17;9:14. doi: 10.1186/1748-5908-9-14.
4
Cancer statistics, 2014.癌症统计数据,2014 年。
CA Cancer J Clin. 2014 Jan-Feb;64(1):9-29. doi: 10.3322/caac.21208. Epub 2014 Jan 7.
5
The use of quality indicators to promote accountability in health care: the good, the bad, and the ugly.利用质量指标提升医疗保健领域的问责制:好的方面、坏的方面与丑陋的方面。
Open Med. 2012 Jun 19;6(2):e75-9. Print 2012.
6
Effective feedback for maintenance of competence: from data delivery to trusting dialogues.维持专业能力的有效反馈:从数据传递到信任对话
CMAJ. 2013 Apr 2;185(6):463-4. doi: 10.1503/cmaj.121772. Epub 2013 Mar 11.
7
Audit and feedback: effects on professional practice and healthcare outcomes.审核与反馈:对专业实践和医疗结果的影响。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2012 Jun 13;2012(6):CD000259. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD000259.pub3.
8
Commentary: Urgently needed: a safe place for self-assessment on the path to maintaining competence and improving performance.述评:在保持能力和提高绩效的道路上,急需一个安全的自我评估场所。
Acad Med. 2010 Jan;85(1):16-8. doi: 10.1097/ACM.0b013e3181c41b6f.
9
Meta-analysis: audit and feedback features impact effectiveness on care quality.荟萃分析:审核与反馈特征对医疗质量的有效性产生影响。
Med Care. 2009 Mar;47(3):356-63. doi: 10.1097/MLR.0b013e3181893f6b.
10
Cancer Care Ontario Colonoscopy Standards: standards and evidentiary base.安大略省癌症护理结肠镜检查标准:标准与证据基础
Can J Gastroenterol. 2007 Nov;21 Suppl D(Suppl D):5D-24D.