Australian Institute of Health Innovation, Macquarie University, Level 6, 75 Talavera Road, NSW 2109, Australia.
Cancer Research Division, Cancer Council NSW, 153 Dowling St, Woolloomooloo, NSW 2011, Australia.
Int J Qual Health Care. 2020 Feb 6;32(Supplement_1):89-98. doi: 10.1093/intqhc/mzz110.
Healthcare accreditation surveyors are well positioned to gain access to hospitals and apply their existing data collection skills to research. Consequently, we contracted and trained a surveyor cohort to collect research data for the Deepening our Understanding of Quality in Australia (DUQuA) project. The aim of this study is to explore and compare surveyors' perceptions and experiences in collecting quality and safety data for accreditation and for health services research.
A qualitative, comparative study.
Ten surveyors participated in semi-structured interviews, which were audio recorded, transcribed and coded using Nvivo11. Interview transcripts of participants were analysed thematically and separately, providing an opportunity for comparison and for identifying common themes and subthemes.
INTERVENTION(S): None.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): Topics addressed data collection for healthcare accreditation and research, including preparation and training, structure, organization, attitudes and behaviours of staff and perceptions of their role.
Five themes and ten subthemes emerged from the interviews: (1) overlapping facilitators for accreditation and research data collection, (2) accreditation-specific facilitators, (3) overlapping barriers for accreditation and research data collection, (4) research data collection-specific barriers and (5) needs and recommendations. Subthemes were (1.1) preparation and training availability, (1.2) prior knowledge and experiences; (2.1) ease of access, (2.2) high staff engagement, (3.1) time, (4.1) poor access and structure, (4.2) lack of staff engagement, (4.3) organizational changes; (5.1) short-notice accreditation and (5.2) preparation for future research.
Although hospital accreditation and research activities require different approaches to data collection, we found that suitably trained accreditation surveyors were able to perform both activities effectively. The barriers surveyors encountered when collecting data for research provide insight into the challenges that may be faced when visiting hospitals for short-notice accreditation.
医疗保健认证调查员能够很好地进入医院,并利用他们现有的数据收集技能进行研究。因此,我们聘请并培训了一批调查员来为“深化澳大利亚的质量认识(DUQuA)”项目收集研究数据。本研究旨在探讨和比较调查员在为认证和卫生服务研究收集质量和安全数据方面的看法和经验。
定性、比较研究。
十名调查员参加了半结构化访谈,访谈内容被录音、转录并使用 Nvivo11 进行编码。对参与者的访谈记录进行了主题分析,并分别进行了分析,从而有机会进行比较并确定共同的主题和子主题。
无。
调查涵盖了医疗保健认证和研究的数据收集,包括准备和培训、结构、组织、员工的态度和行为以及对其角色的看法。
访谈中出现了五个主题和十个子主题:(1)认证和研究数据收集的重叠促进因素,(2)认证特定的促进因素,(3)认证和研究数据收集的重叠障碍,(4)研究数据收集特定的障碍,以及(5)需求和建议。子主题包括(1.1)准备和培训的可用性,(1.2)先前的知识和经验;(2.1)易于访问,(2.2)员工高度参与,(3.1)时间,(4.1)访问和结构差,(4.2)员工参与度低,(4.3)组织变革;(5.1)紧急认证和(5.2)为未来的研究做准备。
尽管医院认证和研究活动需要不同的方法来收集数据,但我们发现,经过适当培训的认证调查员能够有效地进行这两项活动。调查员在为研究收集数据时遇到的障碍提供了一些见解,了解在为紧急认证访问医院时可能面临的挑战。