Futurum, Region Jönköping County, Sweden; School of Health and Welfare, Jönköping University, Jönköping, Sweden.
Futurum, Region Jönköping County, Jönköping, Sweden.
BMC Fam Pract. 2021 Jun 14;22(1):113. doi: 10.1186/s12875-021-01462-4.
High quality primary care is expected to be the basis of many health care systems. Expectations on primary care are rising as societies age and the burden of chronic disease grows. To stimulate adherence to guidelines and quality improvement, audit and feedback to professionals is often used, but the effects vary. Even with carefully designed audit and feedback practices, barriers related to contextual conditions may prevent quality improvement efforts. The purpose of this study was to explore how professionals and health centre managers in Swedish primary care experience existing forms of audit and feedback, and conditions and barriers for quality improvement, and to explore views on the future use of clinical performance data for quality improvement.
We used an explorative qualitative design. Focus groups were conducted with health centre managers, physicians and other health professionals at seven health centres. The interviews were audio recorded, transcribed and analysed using qualitative content analysis.
Four different types of audit and feedback that regularly occurred at the health centres were identified. The main part of the audit and feedback was "external", from the regional purchasers and funders, and from the owners of the health centres. This audit and feedback focused on non-clinical measures such as revenues, utilisation of resources, and the volume of production. The participants in our study did not perceive that existing audit and feedback practices contributed to improved quality in general. This, along with lack of time for quality improvement, lack of autonomy and lack of quality improvement initiatives at the system (macro) level, were considered barriers to quality improvement at the health centres.
Professionals and health centre managers did not experience audit and feedback practices and existing conditions in Swedish primary care as supportive of quality improvement work. From a professional perspective, audit and feedback with a focus on clinical measures, as well as autonomy for professionals, are necessary to create motivation and space for quality improvement work. Such initiatives also need to be supported by quality improvement efforts at the system (macro) level, which favour transformation to a primary care based system.
高质量的初级保健预计将成为许多医疗保健系统的基础。随着社会老龄化和慢性病负担的增加,对初级保健的期望也在提高。为了促进对指南的遵守和质量改进,通常会对专业人员进行审计和反馈,但效果各不相同。即使采用精心设计的审计和反馈实践,与背景条件相关的障碍也可能会阻碍质量改进工作。本研究的目的是探讨瑞典初级保健中的专业人员和卫生中心管理人员如何体验现有的审计和反馈形式,以及质量改进的条件和障碍,并探讨未来使用临床绩效数据进行质量改进的观点。
我们采用了探索性定性设计。在七个卫生中心,对卫生中心管理人员、医生和其他卫生专业人员进行了焦点小组讨论。访谈进行了录音、转录,并使用定性内容分析进行了分析。
确定了在卫生中心定期发生的四种不同类型的审计和反馈。审计和反馈的主要部分是“外部”的,来自地区采购商和资助者,以及卫生中心的所有者。这种审计和反馈主要关注非临床指标,如收入、资源利用和产量。我们研究中的参与者普遍认为,现有的审计和反馈实践并没有促进整体质量的提高。再加上缺乏时间进行质量改进、缺乏自主权以及系统(宏观)层面缺乏质量改进举措,被认为是卫生中心质量改进的障碍。
专业人员和卫生中心管理人员并没有将瑞典初级保健中的审计和反馈实践及现有情况视为支持质量改进工作的因素。从专业角度来看,关注临床措施的审计和反馈,以及专业人员的自主权,对于激发和为质量改进工作创造空间是必要的。这种举措还需要得到系统(宏观)层面质量改进工作的支持,这有利于向基于初级保健的系统转变。