Developing a Questionnaire Evaluating Knowledge, Attitudes and Behaviors on Audit & Feedback among General Practitioners: A Mixed Methods Study

Author:

Nardi Angelo1ORCID,Mitrova Suzanna2,Angelici Laura2ORCID,De Gregorio Camillo Giulio1,Biliotti Donatella3,De Vito Corrado4,Vecchi Simona2ORCID,Davoli Marina2,Agabiti Nera2,Acampora Anna2ORCID

Affiliation:

1. Local Health District 2, Local Health Authority Roma 1, 00193 Rome, Italy

2. Department of Epidemiology of the Regional Health Service of the Lazio Region, Local Health Authority Roma 1, Via Cristoforo Colombo, 112, 00154 Rome, Italy

3. Local Health District 13, Local Health Authority Roma 1, 00193 Rome, Italy

4. Department of Public Health and Infectious Diseases, Sapienza University of Rome, Piazzale Aldo Moro, 5, 00185 Rome, Italy

Abstract

Background: Audit and Feedback (A&F) is one of the most common strategies used to improve quality in healthcare. However, there is still lack of awareness regarding the enabling factors and barriers that could influence its effectiveness. The aim of this study was to develop a questionnaire to measure the knowledge, attitudes and behaviors of general practitioners (GPs) regarding A&F. The study was performed in the context of the EASY-NET program (project code NET-2016-02364191). Methods: The survey was developed according to two steps. Firstly, a scoping review was performed in order to map the literature on the existing similar instruments with the aim of identifying the sub-domains and possible items to include in a preliminary version of the questionnaire. In the second phase, the questionnaire was reviewed by a multidisciplinary group of experts and administrated to a convenience sample in a pilot survey. Results: Ten papers were included in the scoping review. The survey target and development methodology were heterogenous among the studies. The knowledge, attitudes and behaviors domains were assessed in six, nine and seven studies, respectively. In the first step, 126 pertinent items were extracted and categorized as follows: 8 investigated knowledge, 93 investigated attitudes, and 25 investigated behaviors. Then, 2 sub-domains were identified for knowledge, 14 for attitudes and 7 for behavior. Based on these results, a first version of the survey was developed via consensus among two authors and then revised by the multidisciplinary group of experts in the field of A&F. The final version of the survey included 36 items: 8 in the knowledge domain, 19 in the attitudes domain and 9 in the behaviors domain. The results of the pilot study among 15 GPs suggested a good acceptability and item relevance and accuracy, with positive answers totaling 100% and 93.3% in the proposed questions. Conclusions: The methodology used has shown to be a good strategy for the development of the survey. The survey will be administrated before and after the implementation of an A&F intervention to assess both baseline characteristics and changes after the intervention.

Funder

“Effectiveness of Audit & Feedback strategies to improve healthcare practice and equity in various clinical and organizational setting”

Italian Ministry of Health

regional governments of Lazio, Friuli Venezia-Giulia, Piemonte, Emilia Romagna, Lombardia and Calabria

Publisher

MDPI AG

Subject

Health Information Management,Health Informatics,Health Policy,Leadership and Management

Reference36 articles.

1. Audit and feedback: Effects on professional practice and health care outcomes;Jamtvedt;Cochrane Database Syst. Rev.,2003

2. Audit and feedback: Effects on professional practice and healthcare outcomes;Ivers;Cochrane Database Syst. Rev.,2012

3. Reporting and design elements of audit and feedback interventions: A secondary review;Colquhoun;BMJ Qual. Saf.,2017

4. Growing literature, stagnant science? Systematic review, meta-regression and cumulative analysis of audit and feedback interventions in health care;Ivers;J. Gen. Intern. Med.,2014

5. Reinvigorating stagnant science: Implementation laboratories and a meta-laboratory to efficiently advance the science of audit and feedback;Grimshaw;BMJ Qual. Saf.,2019

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3