• 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

相似文献

1
Rethinking clinical governance: healthcare professionals' views: a Delphi study.重新思考临床治理:医疗保健专业人员的观点:一项德尔菲研究。
BMJ Open. 2017 Jan 12;7(1):e012591. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2016-012591.
2
Defining Resilience for Healthcare Professionals- a Delphi Study.为医疗保健专业人员定义复原力——一项德尔菲研究。
Contemp Nurse. 2023 Dec;59(6):422-433. doi: 10.1080/10376178.2023.2285769. Epub 2024 Jan 17.
3
Learning from people with long-term conditions: new insights for governance in primary healthcare.向患有长期疾病的人学习:初级医疗保健治理的新见解
Health Soc Care Community. 2014 Jul;22(4):405-16. doi: 10.1111/hsc.12097. Epub 2014 Feb 24.
4
Prioritising models of healthcare service delivery for a more sustainable health system: a Delphi study of Australian health policy, clinical practice and management, academic and consumer stakeholders.优先考虑医疗服务提供模式,以建立更具可持续性的卫生系统:对澳大利亚卫生政策、临床实践和管理、学术和消费者利益相关者的德尔菲研究。
Aust Health Rev. 2021 Aug;45(4):425-432. doi: 10.1071/AH20160.
5
Policy priorities in diabetes care: a Delphi study.糖尿病护理中的政策重点:一项德尔菲研究。
Qual Health Care. 1996 Mar;5(1):3-8. doi: 10.1136/qshc.5.1.3.
6
Care coordination across healthcare systems: development of a research agenda, implications for practice, and recommendations for policy based on a modified Delphi panel.医疗保健系统中的护理协调:基于改良 Delphi 小组的研究议程制定、对实践的影响和政策建议。
BMJ Open. 2023 May 17;13(5):e060232. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2021-060232.
7
Health professionals' experience of teamwork education in acute hospital settings: a systematic review of qualitative literature.医疗专业人员在急症医院环境中团队合作教育的经验:对定性文献的系统综述
JBI Database System Rev Implement Rep. 2016 Apr;14(4):96-137. doi: 10.11124/JBISRIR-2016-1843.
8
Patient-mediated interventions to improve professional practice.患者介导的干预措施以改善专业实践。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2018 Sep 11;9(9):CD012472. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD012472.pub2.
9
Healthcare professionals' perceptions of clinical governance implementation: a qualitative New Zealand study of 3205 open-ended survey comments.医疗保健专业人员对临床治理实施的看法:新西兰的一项定性研究,对 3205 份开放式调查意见的分析。
BMJ Open. 2015 Jan 5;5(1):e006157. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2014-006157.
10
Understanding corporate governance of healthcare quality: a comparative case study of eight Australian public hospitals.理解医疗质量的公司治理:对澳大利亚八家公立医院的比较案例研究。
BMC Health Serv Res. 2019 Oct 21;19(1):725. doi: 10.1186/s12913-019-4593-0.

引用本文的文献

1
Elements of healthcare delivery required to facilitate the clinical governance of hospital pharmacy services: a document review.促进医院药学服务临床治理所需的医疗服务要素:文献综述
Health Res Policy Syst. 2025 Aug 4;23(1):100. doi: 10.1186/s12961-025-01378-w.
2
The importance and feasibility of hospital interventions to prevent and manage patient aggression and violence against physicians in China: a Delphi study.中国医院干预措施预防和管理患者针对医生的攻击和暴力行为的重要性和可行性:一项德尔菲研究。
Hum Resour Health. 2024 May 27;22(1):34. doi: 10.1186/s12960-024-00914-z.
3
British Society of Gastroenterology guidelines on sedation in gastrointestinal endoscopy.英国胃肠病学会胃肠内镜镇静指南。
Gut. 2024 Jan 5;73(2):219-245. doi: 10.1136/gutjnl-2023-330396.
4
Development of a tool to assess environmental factors to support home care - a Delphi study.开发一种评估环境因素以支持家庭护理的工具 - 德尔菲研究。
BMC Geriatr. 2023 Aug 21;23(1):501. doi: 10.1186/s12877-023-04207-3.
5
Is anybody 'Learning' from deaths? Sequential content and reflexive thematic analysis of national statutory reporting within the NHS in England 2017-2020.有人从死亡中吸取教训吗?2017-2020 年英格兰国民保健制度国家法定报告中的连续内容和反思性主题分析。
BMJ Open Qual. 2023 Feb;12(1). doi: 10.1136/bmjoq-2022-002093.
6
Grounded accountability in life-and-death high-consequence healthcare settings.在生死攸关的高风险医疗环境中建立切实可行的问责制。
J Health Organ Manag. 2021 Aug 24;ahead-of-print(ahead-of-print):228-44. doi: 10.1108/JHOM-03-2021-0116.
7
Understanding how and why audits work in improving the quality of hospital care: A systematic realist review.理解审核如何以及为何能改善医院护理质量:系统的现实主义综述。
PLoS One. 2021 Mar 31;16(3):e0248677. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0248677. eCollection 2021.
8
Clinical governance programme in patients with acute coronary syndrome: design and methodology of a quality improvement initiative.急性冠状动脉综合征患者的临床治理计划:一项质量改进计划的设计与方法。
Open Heart. 2020 Dec;7(2). doi: 10.1136/openhrt-2020-001415.
9
Mapping clinical governance to practitioner roles and responsibilities.将临床治理映射到从业者的角色和责任。
J Health Organ Manag. 2020 Dec 18;ahead-of-print(ahead-of-print):18-33. doi: 10.1108/JHOM-02-2020-0065.
10
Current Practices and Existing Gaps of Continuing Medical Education among Resident Physicians in Abha City, Saudi Arabia.沙特阿拉伯阿巴市住院医师继续医学教育的现状及差距
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2020 Nov 16;17(22):8483. doi: 10.3390/ijerph17228483.

本文引用的文献

1
Quality management and perceptions of teamwork and safety climate in European hospitals.欧洲医院的质量管理以及对团队合作和安全氛围的认知
Int J Qual Health Care. 2015 Dec;27(6):499-506. doi: 10.1093/intqhc/mzv079. Epub 2015 Oct 6.
2
Supporting and activating clinical governance development in Ireland: sharing our learning.支持并推动爱尔兰临床治理发展:分享我们的经验。
J Health Organ Manag. 2015;29(4):455-81. doi: 10.1108/JHOM-03-2014-0046.
3
Challenges in achieving patient participation: A review of how patient participation is addressed in empirical studies.实现患者参与面临的挑战:对实证研究中如何处理患者参与问题的综述。
Int J Nurs Stud. 2015 Sep;52(9):1525-38. doi: 10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2015.04.008. Epub 2015 May 1.
4
Are some health professionals more cognizant of clinical governance development concepts than others? Findings from a New Zealand study.某些健康专业人员是否比其他人员更了解临床治理发展概念?一项新西兰研究的结果。
J Public Health (Oxf). 2016 Jun;38(2):363-70. doi: 10.1093/pubmed/fdv045. Epub 2015 Apr 12.
5
Healthcare professionals' perceptions of clinical governance implementation: a qualitative New Zealand study of 3205 open-ended survey comments.医疗保健专业人员对临床治理实施的看法:新西兰的一项定性研究,对 3205 份开放式调查意见的分析。
BMJ Open. 2015 Jan 5;5(1):e006157. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2014-006157.
6
Beyond rhetoric: we need a strategy for patient involvement in the health service.超越言辞:我们需要一项让患者参与医疗服务的策略。
BMJ. 2014 Jun 23;348:g4072. doi: 10.1136/bmj.g4072.
7
The investigators reflect: what we have learned from the Deepening our Understanding of Quality Improvement in Europe (DUQuE) study.研究人员反思道:我们从“深化对欧洲质量改进的理解”(DUQuE)研究中学到了什么。
Int J Qual Health Care. 2014 Apr;26 Suppl 1(Suppl 1):2-4. doi: 10.1093/intqhc/mzu024. Epub 2014 Mar 18.
8
Leadership, safety climate, and continuous quality improvement: impact on process quality and patient safety.领导力、安全氛围与持续质量改进:对流程质量和患者安全的影响。
Health Care Manage Rev. 2015 Jan-Mar;40(1):24-34. doi: 10.1097/HMR.0000000000000006.
9
Predictors of health care professionals' attitudes towards involvement in safety-relevant behaviours.卫生保健专业人员对参与安全相关行为的态度的预测因素。
J Eval Clin Pract. 2014 Feb;20(1):12-9. doi: 10.1111/jep.12073. Epub 2013 Aug 13.
10
"A manager in the minds of doctors:" a comparison of new modes of control in European hospitals.医生心目中的管理者:欧洲医院新型管控模式比较
BMC Health Serv Res. 2013 Jul 2;13:246. doi: 10.1186/1472-6963-13-246.

重新思考临床治理:医疗保健专业人员的观点:一项德尔菲研究。

Rethinking clinical governance: healthcare professionals' views: a Delphi study.

作者信息

Veenstra Gepke L, Ahaus Kees, Welker Gera A, Heineman Erik, van der Laan Maarten J, Muntinghe Friso L H

机构信息

Centre of Expertise on Quality and Safety, University of Groningen, University Medical Centre Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.

Faculty of Economics and Business, Department Operations, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.

出版信息

BMJ Open. 2017 Jan 12;7(1):e012591. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2016-012591.

DOI:10.1136/bmjopen-2016-012591
PMID:28082364
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5253713/
Abstract

OBJECTIVE

Although the guiding principle of clinical governance states that healthcare professionals are the leading contributors to quality and safety in healthcare, little is known about what healthcare professionals perceive as important for clinical governance. The aim of this study is to clarify this by exploring healthcare professionals' views on clinical governance.

DESIGN

Based on a literature search, a list of 99 elements related to clinical governance was constructed. This list was refined, extended and restricted during a three-round Delphi study.

SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS

The panel of experts was formed of 24 healthcare professionals from an academic hospital that is seen as a leader in terms of its clinical governance expertise in the Netherlands.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Rated importance of each element on a four-point scale.

RESULTS

The 50 elements that the panel perceived as most important related to adopting a bottom-up approach to clinical governance, ownership, teamwork, learning from mistakes and feedback. The panel did not reach a consensus concerning elements that referred to patient involvement. Elements that referred to a managerial approach to clinical governance and standardisation of work were rejected by the panel.

CONCLUSIONS

In the views of the panel of experts, clinical governance is a practice-based, value-driven approach that has the goal of delivering the highest possible quality care and ensuring the safety of patients. Bottom-up approaches and effective teamwork are seen as crucial for high quality and safe healthcare. Striving for high quality and safe healthcare is underpinned by continuous learning, shared responsibility and good relationships and collaboration between healthcare professionals, managers and patients.

摘要

目的

尽管临床治理的指导原则表明医疗保健专业人员是医疗保健质量和安全的主要贡献者,但对于医疗保健专业人员认为对临床治理重要的因素却知之甚少。本研究的目的是通过探索医疗保健专业人员对临床治理的看法来阐明这一点。

设计

基于文献检索,构建了一份与临床治理相关的99个要素的清单。在三轮德尔菲研究中对该清单进行了完善、扩展和限制。

设置与参与者

专家小组由来自荷兰一家学术医院的24名医疗保健专业人员组成,该医院在临床治理专业知识方面被视为领导者。

主要观察指标

在四点量表上对每个要素的重要性进行评分。

结果

专家小组认为最重要的50个要素与采用自下而上的临床治理方法、自主权、团队合作、从错误中学习和反馈有关。专家小组在涉及患者参与的要素上未达成共识。专家小组拒绝了涉及临床治理管理方法和工作标准化的要素。

结论

在专家小组看来,临床治理是一种基于实践、价值驱动的方法,其目标是提供尽可能高的医疗质量并确保患者安全。自下而上的方法和有效的团队合作对于高质量和安全的医疗保健至关重要。追求高质量和安全的医疗保健的基础是持续学习、共同责任以及医疗保健专业人员、管理人员和患者之间良好的关系与合作。