Department of Trauma Surgery, Leiden University Medical Center, Albinusdreef 2, 2333ZA, Leiden, The Netherlands.
Dutch Institute for Clinical Auditing, Leiden, The Netherlands.
Arch Osteoporos. 2019 Nov 21;14(1):110. doi: 10.1007/s11657-019-0652-8.
To ensure meaningful results in a clinical audit, as many hospitals as possible should participate. To optimise participation, the data collection process should either be performed by additional staff or be automated. Active participation may be promoted by offering relevant external parties insight into the actual quality of care.
The aim of the study was to identify which facilitators and barriers experienced by hospital staff are associated with participation in the ongoing nationwide multidisciplinary Dutch Hip Fracture Audit (DHFA).
A survey including questions about the respondents' characteristics, hospital level of participation and factors of influence on DHFA participation was sent to hip fracture surgeons. The factors were based on results of semi-structured interviews held with hospital staff involved in hip fracture care. Univariable and multivariable logistic regression analyses were used to establish which respondent characteristics and factors were associated with participation and active participation (≥ 80% of patients registered) in the DHFA. Factors significantly increasing the (active) participation in the DHFA were classified as facilitators, and factors significantly decreasing the (active) participation in the DHFA as barriers.
One hundred nine surgeons filled out the questionnaire. The factors most agreed on were availability of staffing capacity for data collection and automated data import. A lower intention to participate was associated with being an academic surgeon (odds ratio, 0.15; 95% confidence interval, 0.04-0.52) and an orthopaedic surgeon (odds ratio, 0.30; 95% confidence interval, 0.10-0.90). Data sharing with relevant external parties was associated with active participation (odds ratio, 3.19; 95% confidence interval, 1.14-8.95).
To improve participation in a nationwide clinical audit, it seems that the data collection should either be performed by additional staff or be automated. Active participation is facilitated if audit data is made available to other parties, such as insurers, healthcare authorities or policymakers.
本研究旨在确定与参与正在进行的全国多学科荷兰髋部骨折审计(DHFA)相关的医院工作人员的促进因素和障碍因素。
向髋部骨折外科医生发送了一份包含有关受访者特征、医院参与程度以及影响 DHFA 参与因素的问题的调查。这些因素是基于对参与髋部骨折护理的医院工作人员进行的半结构化访谈的结果。使用单变量和多变量逻辑回归分析确定哪些受访者特征和因素与参与和积极参与(≥80%的患者注册)DHFA 相关。显著增加 DHFA (积极)参与的因素被归类为促进因素,而显著降低 DHFA (积极)参与的因素被归类为障碍因素。
109 名外科医生填写了问卷。最一致的因素是数据收集和自动化数据导入的人员配备能力。参与意向较低与学术外科医生(比值比,0.15;95%置信区间,0.04-0.52)和骨科医生(比值比,0.30;95%置信区间,0.10-0.90)相关。与相关外部方共享数据与积极参与相关(比值比,3.19;95%置信区间,1.14-8.95)。
为了提高全国临床审计的参与度,似乎应该由额外的工作人员或自动化来完成数据收集。如果审计数据提供给其他方,如保险公司、医疗保健当局或政策制定者,那么参与就会更加积极。