Suppr超能文献

连续性、基于风险的、在非工作时间进行的全科医疗咨询同行评议:一项关于其益处和局限性的定性访谈研究。

Continuous, risk-based, consultation peer review in out-of-hours general practice: a qualitative interview study of the benefits and limitations.

机构信息

Centre for Academic Primary Care, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol.

National Institute for Health Research Applied Research Collaboration West, Bristol.

出版信息

Br J Gen Pract. 2021 Sep 30;71(711):e797-e805. doi: 10.3399/BJGP.2021.0076. Print 2021 Oct.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Systems to detect and minimise unwarranted variation in clinician practice are crucial to ensure increasingly multidisciplinary healthcare workforces are supported to practise to their full potential. Such systems are limited in English general practice settings, with implications for the efficiency and safety of care.

AIM

To evaluate the benefits and limitations of a continuous, risk-based, consultation peer-review system used for 10 years by an out-of-hours general practice service in Bristol, UK.

DESIGN AND SETTING

A qualitative study in South West England.

METHOD

Semi-structured interviews with intervention users (clinicians, peer reviewers, and clinical management), analysed by inductive thematic analysis and integrated into a programme theory.

RESULTS

Twenty clinicians were interviewed between September 2018 and January 2019. Interviewees indicated that the intervention supported clinician learning through improved peer feedback, highlighting learning needs and validating practice. It was compared favourably with existing structures of ensuring clinician competence, supporting standardisation of supervision, clinical governance, and learning culture. These benefits were potentially limited by intervention factors such as differential feedback quality between clinician groups, the efficiency of methods to identify learning needs, and limitations of assessments based on written clinical notes. Contextual factors such as clinician experience, motivation, and organisational learning culture influenced the perception of the intervention as a support or a stressor.

CONCLUSION

The findings demonstrate the potential of continuous, risk-based, consultation peer review to support clinicians in an increasingly multidisciplinary general practice workforce to efficiently and safely practise to their full potential. The programme theory provides a theoretical basis to maximise the benefits and accommodate the potential limitations of this methodology.

摘要

背景

检测和最小化临床医生实践中不必要的差异的系统对于确保日益多学科的医疗保健工作队伍得到支持以充分发挥其潜力至关重要。这种系统在英国的一般实践环境中受到限制,这对护理的效率和安全性有影响。

目的

评估一种连续的、基于风险的咨询同行评审系统在英国布里斯托尔的一个非工作时间的一般实践服务中使用 10 年的效果,该系统用于评估连续的、基于风险的咨询同行评审系统在英国布里斯托尔的一个非工作时间的一般实践服务中使用 10 年的效果。

设计和设置

在英格兰西南部进行的定性研究。

方法

对干预措施使用者(临床医生、同行评审员和临床管理人员)进行半结构式访谈,通过归纳主题分析进行分析,并整合到一个方案理论中。

结果

2018 年 9 月至 2019 年 1 月期间对 20 名临床医生进行了访谈。受访者表示,该干预措施通过改善同行反馈来支持临床医生的学习,突出学习需求并验证实践。它与确保临床医生能力的现有结构相比具有优势,支持监督的标准化、临床治理和学习文化。这些好处可能受到干预因素的限制,例如临床医生群体之间反馈质量的差异、识别学习需求的方法的效率以及基于书面临床记录的评估的局限性。临床医生的经验、动机和组织学习文化等背景因素影响了他们对干预措施的看法,认为这是一种支持还是一种压力源。

结论

研究结果表明,连续的、基于风险的咨询同行评审有可能支持日益多学科的一般实践工作队伍中的临床医生,以高效和安全地充分发挥他们的潜力。该方案理论为最大限度地发挥这种方法的益处和适应其潜在的局限性提供了理论基础。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/4427/8463151/5bc8c9441713/bjgpoct-2021-71-711-e797-1.jpg

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