The Friends and Family Test in general practice in England: a qualitative study of the views of staff and patients

Author:

Manacorda Tommaso,Erens Bob,Black Nick,Mays Nicholas

Abstract

BackgroundThe Friends and Family Test (FFT) was introduced into general practices in England in 2015 to provide staff with information on patients’ views of their experience of care.AimTo examine the views of practice staff and patients of the FFT, how the results are used, and to recommend improvements.Design and settingA qualitative study of a national representative sample of 42 general practices.MethodSemi-structured interviews with 43 clinicians, 48 practice managers, and 27 patient representatives. Interviews were audiotaped, transcribed, and analysed thematically.ResultsAlthough the FFT imposed little extra work on practices, it was judged to provide little additional insight over existing methods and to have had minimal impact on improving quality. Staff lacked confidence in the accuracy of the results given the lack of a representative sample and the risk of bias. The FFT question was judged to be inappropriate as in many areas there was no alternative practice for patients to choose, patients’ individual needs would not be the same as those of their friends and relatives, and an overall assessment failed to identify any specific aspects of good- or poor-quality care. Despite being intended to support local quality improvement, there was widespread unease about the FFT, with many responders perceiving it as a tool for national bodies to monitor general practices.ConclusionIf the use of a single-item questionnaire is to continue, changes should be made to the wording. It should be focused on stimulating local quality improvement, and practice staff should be supported to use the results effectively.

Publisher

Royal College of General Practitioners

Subject

Family Practice

Reference18 articles.

1. The role of patient experience surveys in quality assurance and improvement: a focus group study in English general practice

2. Asprey A Campbell JL Newbould J (2013) Br J Gen Pract, Challenges to the credibility of patient feedback in primary healthcare settings: a qualitative study. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3399/bjgp13X664252.

3. Carter M Davey A Wright C (2016) Br J Gen Pract, Capturing patient experience: a qualitative study of implementing real-time feedback in primary care. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3399/bjgp16X687085.

4. Department of Health. (2012) NHS patient experience framework, https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/215159/dh_132788.pdf (accessed 24 Mar 2017).

5. Department of Health. (2016) NHS Outcomes Framework: at-a-glance. List of outcomes and indicators in the NHS Outcomes Framework for 2016–17, https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/513157/NHSOF_at_a_glance.pdf (accessed 24 Mar 2017).

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