Developing effective feedback on quality of anaesthetic care: what are its most valuable characteristics from a clinical perspective?

Author:

D’Lima Danielle M1,Moore Joanna2,Bottle Alex3,Brett Stephen J4,Arnold Glenn M5,Benn Jonathan6

Affiliation:

1. Research Psychologist, Imperial Patient Safety Translational Research Centre, Department of Surgery and Cancer, Faculty of Medicine, Imperial College London, UK

2. Researcher, Imperial Patient Safety Translational Research Centre, Department of Surgery and Cancer, Faculty of Medicine, Imperial College London, UK

3. Senior Lecturer, School of Public Health, Imperial College London, UK

4. Consultant Intensivist, Centre for Perioperative Medicine and Critical Care Research, Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, UK

5. Consultant Anaesthetist, Department of Anaesthesia, Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, UK

6. Lecturer, Imperial Patient Safety Translational Research Centre, Department of Surgery and Cancer, Faculty of Medicine, Imperial College London, UK

Abstract

Objectives Research suggests that better feedback from quality and safety indicators leads to enhanced capability of clinicians and departments to improve care and change behaviour. The aim of the current study was to investigate the characteristics of feedback perceived by clinicians to be of most value. Methods Data were collected using a survey designed as part of a wider evaluation of a data feedback initiative in anaesthesia. Eighty-nine consultant anaesthetists from two English NHS acute Trusts completed the survey. Multiple linear regression with hierarchical variable entry was used to investigate which characteristics of feedback predict its perceived usefulness for monitoring variation and improving care. Results The final model demonstrated that the relevance of the quality indicators to the specific service area (β = 0.64, p = 0.01) and the credibility of the data as coming from a trustworthy, unbiased source (β = 0.55, p = 0.01) were the significant predictors, having controlled for all other covariates. Conclusion For clinicians to engage with effective quality monitoring and feedback, the perceived local relevance of indicators and trust in the credibility of the resulting data are paramount.

Publisher

SAGE Publications

Subject

Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health,Health Policy

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