University of Cambridge School of Clinical Medicine, Cambridge, UK
Queen Mary University of London Wolfson Institute of Population Health, London, UK.
BMJ Open Qual. 2024 Jul 24;13(3):e002839. doi: 10.1136/bmjoq-2024-002839.
Quality improvement (QI) is used by healthcare organisations internationally to improve care. Unless QI explicitly addresses equity, projects that aim to improve care may exacerbate health and care inequalities for disadvantaged groups. There are several QI frameworks used in primary care, but we do not know the extent to which they consider equity. This work aimed to investigate whether primary care QI frameworks consider equity.
We conducted a search of MEDLINE, EMBASE and key websites to compile a list of the QI frameworks used in primary care. This list was refined by an expert panel. Guidance documents for each of the QI frameworks were identified from national websites or QI organisations. We undertook a document analysis of the guidance using NVivo.
We analysed 15 guidance documents. We identified the following themes: (1) there was a limited discussion of equity or targeted QI for disadvantaged groups in the documents, (2) there were indirect considerations of inequalities via patient involvement or targeting QI to patient demographics and (3) there was a greater focus on efficiency than equity in the documents.
There is limited consideration of equity in QI frameworks used in primary care. Where equity is discussed, it is implicit and open to interpretation. This research demonstrates a need for frameworks to be revised with an explicit equity focus to ensure the distribution of benefits from QI is equitable.
国际上,医疗机构采用质量改进(QI)来改善医疗服务。除非 QI 明确解决公平问题,否则旨在改善医疗服务的项目可能会加剧弱势群体的健康和护理不平等。初级保健中使用了几种 QI 框架,但我们不知道它们在多大程度上考虑了公平性。这项工作旨在调查初级保健 QI 框架是否考虑公平性。
我们对 MEDLINE、EMBASE 和主要网站进行了搜索,以编制初级保健中使用的 QI 框架列表。该列表由专家小组进行了精炼。从国家网站或 QI 组织中确定了每个 QI 框架的指南文件。我们使用 NVivo 对指南进行了文件分析。
我们分析了 15 份指导文件。我们确定了以下主题:(1)文件中对公平性或针对弱势群体的 QI 的讨论有限,(2)通过患者参与或针对患者人口统计学特征来间接考虑不平等问题,(3)文件更侧重于效率而不是公平性。
初级保健中使用的 QI 框架对公平性的考虑有限。在讨论公平性的地方,它是隐含的,容易产生误解。这项研究表明,需要对框架进行修订,以明确公平性为重点,确保 QI 带来的利益分配公平。