Experiences of quality cluster meetings in general practice - Findings from a national survey two years after initiation of quality clusters in Denmark.
Maria Bundgaard, Line Bjørnskov Pedersen, Jens Søndergaard, Marius Brostrøm Kousgaard, Sonja Wehberg, Dorte Ejg Jarbøl
{"title":"Experiences of quality cluster meetings in general practice - Findings from a national survey two years after initiation of quality clusters in Denmark.","authors":"Maria Bundgaard, Line Bjørnskov Pedersen, Jens Søndergaard, Marius Brostrøm Kousgaard, Sonja Wehberg, Dorte Ejg Jarbøl","doi":"10.1186/s12875-025-02759-4","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>A new national model for quality improvement in general practice based on the concept of quality clusters was introduced in Denmark in 2018. A quality cluster is a local group of general practitioners (GPs) meeting regularly to engage in quality improvement on self-selected topics.</p><p><strong>Aim: </strong>To explore (1) GPs' experiences of cluster meetings, and (2) associations between meeting experiences and self-reported benefits of participation.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>A national cross-sectional survey study in general practice. In 2020, a questionnaire regarding quality clusters was sent to all Danish GPs (n = 3432). GPs self-reported benefits from cluster participation comprised: overall benefit, changes in clinical organization and workflow, changes in drug prescriptions, improved knowledge of guidelines, and improved patient care.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>1219 GPs (36%) participated. Results showed that cluster meetings were partly or fully perceived to be well organized (89%) and focused on relevant topics (89%), and that meetings took place in a friendly atmosphere (90%) where experiences were shared (93%). Two-thirds of the GPs found that the data was useful (67%), that their cluster showed a high level of commitment (66%), and that agreement was easily reached (61%). Meetings which were perceived as productive, with useful data, and with a high level of commitment were associated with statistically significantly higher odds for reporting benefits across all self-reported benefits investigated.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Overall, cluster meetings were perceived positively by the GPs and associated with benefits when experienced as productive, with useful data, and a high level of commitment.</p>","PeriodicalId":72428,"journal":{"name":"BMC primary care","volume":"26 1","pages":"63"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11874380/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMC primary care","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12875-025-02759-4","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: A new national model for quality improvement in general practice based on the concept of quality clusters was introduced in Denmark in 2018. A quality cluster is a local group of general practitioners (GPs) meeting regularly to engage in quality improvement on self-selected topics.
Aim: To explore (1) GPs' experiences of cluster meetings, and (2) associations between meeting experiences and self-reported benefits of participation.
Design: A national cross-sectional survey study in general practice. In 2020, a questionnaire regarding quality clusters was sent to all Danish GPs (n = 3432). GPs self-reported benefits from cluster participation comprised: overall benefit, changes in clinical organization and workflow, changes in drug prescriptions, improved knowledge of guidelines, and improved patient care.
Results: 1219 GPs (36%) participated. Results showed that cluster meetings were partly or fully perceived to be well organized (89%) and focused on relevant topics (89%), and that meetings took place in a friendly atmosphere (90%) where experiences were shared (93%). Two-thirds of the GPs found that the data was useful (67%), that their cluster showed a high level of commitment (66%), and that agreement was easily reached (61%). Meetings which were perceived as productive, with useful data, and with a high level of commitment were associated with statistically significantly higher odds for reporting benefits across all self-reported benefits investigated.
Conclusion: Overall, cluster meetings were perceived positively by the GPs and associated with benefits when experienced as productive, with useful data, and a high level of commitment.