Is audit research? The relationships between clinical audit and social-research.

Abstract

Purpose: Quality has an established history in health care. Audit, as a means of quality assessment, is well understood and the existing literature has identified links between audit and research processes. This paper reviews the relationships between audit and research processes, highlighting how audit can be improved through the principles and practice of social research.

Design/methodology/approach: The review begins by defining the audit process. It goes on to explore salient relationships between clinical audit and research, grouped into the following broad themes: ethical considerations, highlighting responsibilities towards others and the need for ethical review for audit; asking questions and using appropriate methods, emphasising transparency in audit methods; conceptual issues, including identifying problematic concepts, such as "satisfaction", and the importance of reflexivity within audit; emphasising research in context, highlighting the benefits of vignettes and action research; complementary methods, demonstrating improvements for the quality of findings; and training and multidisciplinary working, suggesting the need for closer relationships between researchers and clinical practitioners.

Findings: Audit processes cannot be considered research. Both audit and research processes serve distinct purposes.

Originality/value: Attention to the principles of research when conducting audit are necessary to improve the quality of audit and, in turn, the quality of health care.