Responses of physicians to an objective safety and quality knowledge test: a cross-sectional study

Author:

Burke Harry BORCID,King Heidi B

Abstract

ObjectiveFor physicians to practice safe high quality medicine they must have sufficient safety and quality knowledge. Although a great deal is known about the safety and quality perceptions, attitudes and beliefs of physicians, little is known about their safety and quality knowledge. This study tested the objective safety and quality knowledge of practicing US primary care physicians.DesignCross-sectional objective test of safety and quality knowledge.SettingPrimary care physicians practicing in the USA.ParticipantsStudy consisted of 518 US practicing primary care physicians who answered an email invitation. Fifty-four percent were family medicine and 46% were internal medicine physicians.The response rate was 66%.InterventionThe physicians took a 24-question multiple-choice test over the internet.OutcomeThe outcome was the percent correct.ResultsThe average number of correct answers was 11.4 (SD, 2.69), 48% correct. Three common clinical vignettes questions were answered correctly by 45% of the physicians. Five common radiation exposures questions were answered correctly by 40% of the physicians. Seven common healthcare quality and safety questions were answered correctly by 43% of the physicians. Seven Donabedian’s model of structure, process and outcome measure questions were answered correctly by 67% of the physicians. Two Institute of Medicine’s definitions of quality and safety questions were answered correctly by 19.5% of the physicians.ConclusionForty-eight per cent of the physicians’ answers to the objective safety and quality questions were correct. To our knowledge, this is the first assessment of the objective safety and quality knowledge of practicing US primary care physicians.

Publisher

BMJ

Subject

General Medicine

Reference31 articles.

1. Kohn L , Corrigan J , Donaldson M , eds. To Err Is Human: Building a Safer Health System. Washington, DC: Institute of Medicine, 1999.

2. National Quality Forum. Available: http://www.qualityforum.org/home [Accessed 27 August 2021].

3. Smith M , Saunders R , Stuckhardt L , eds. Best care at lowest cost: the path to continuously learning health care in America. Washington, DC: Institute of Medicine, 2013.

4. Reporting of Adverse Events in Published and Unpublished Studies of Health Care Interventions: A Systematic Review

5. The Safety Attitudes Questionnaire: psychometric properties, benchmarking data, and emerging research

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