Operational failures in general practice: a consensus-building study on the priorities for improvement

Author:

Sinnott CarolORCID,Alboksmaty AhmedORCID,Moxey Jordan M.ORCID,Morley KatherineORCID,Parkinson SarahORCID,Burt JenniORCID,Dixon-Woods MaryORCID

Abstract

Background: System problems known as operational failures can impact greatly on the work of general practitioners (GPs), with negative consequences for patient and professional experience, efficiency, and effectiveness. Many operational failures are tractable to improvement, but which should be prioritised is less clear. Aim: To build consensus amongst GPs and patients on the operational failures to prioritise for improvement in NHS general practice. Methods: We conducted two modified Delphi exercises online between Feb-Oct 2021: one with NHS GPs, and a subsequent exercise with patients. Over two rounds, GPs rated the importance of a list of operational failures (n=45) that had been compiled using existing evidence. The resulting shortlist was presented to patients for rating over two rounds. Data were analysed using medians and interquartile ranges. Consensus was defined as 80% of responses falling within one value below and above the median. Results: Sixty-two GPs responded to the first Delphi survey, with 53.2% (n=33) retained through round two. This exercise yielded consensus on fourteen failures as a priority for improvement which were presented to patients. Thirty-seven patients responded to the first patient Delphi survey, with 89.2% (n=33) retained through round two. Patients identified thirteen failures as priorities. The highest scoring failures included inaccuracies in patients’ medical notes, missing test results and difficulties referring patients to other providers because of problems in referral forms. Conclusion: This study has identified the highest priority operational failures in general practice, and indicates where GPs and patients feel improvement efforts in general practice should be focused.

Publisher

Royal College of General Practitioners

Subject

Family Practice

Cited by 1 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

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