Perspectives on UK Care Quality Commission’s Inspections of Primary Care Practices

K. Sidhu, Kalindi Tumurugoti, Naureen Bhatti, Abrar Hussein, I. Chakravorty
{"title":"Perspectives on UK Care Quality Commission’s Inspections of Primary Care Practices","authors":"K. Sidhu, Kalindi Tumurugoti, Naureen Bhatti, Abrar Hussein, I. Chakravorty","doi":"10.38192/1.7.2.7","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background \nIn the middle of a pandemic, when the health and social care services were experiencing their worst challenges and staff were facing burnout, the feedback from primary care professionals raised concerns on the UK Care Quality Commission’s inspection regime and specially on its effectiveness, impact on services and particularly relating to its equality, diversity and inclusion aspects.  \nMethods \nAn online anonymised survey was carried out in July 2021 and received 130 responses, the majority from the GP partners but also locum and sessional colleagues as well as other members of the \ngeneral practice team. \nResults \nAbout 80% of respondents reported having a good rating or an outstanding rating. But fewer than 20% of the participants felt that their experience of the CQC inspections was positive. More than 85% of respondents feel that the inspections did not add value to the clinical care or prevent harm. 80% felt that the inspections were not fair, transparent, objective, or replicable and found these to be traumatic rather than being a positive or constructive experience. More than 50% felt that Practices led by Black and AsianGPs small practices and those inner city, and rural practices in areas of deprivation receive disproportionately poorer outcomes. Three in four respondents felt that the inspections were intense and took staff away from direct clinical care. Almost 86% of respondents felt that the inspectors demonstrated insights into the systemic challenges faced by primary care. About half of the respondents did not feel supported by the LMCs and/or their CCG.  \nDiscussion & Conclusion \nThe findings demonstrated that the inspections were not considered to be effective or constructive and took the general practice team away from patient care. Of particular concern was that perception that the system was unfair and discriminatory for Black and Asian GPs small practices and those in inner city or rural locations with multiple deprivation. The authors urge the CQC to ensure that the profession is supported and that any inspection process is fair, non-discriminatory and improves patient care. ","PeriodicalId":75015,"journal":{"name":"The Homoeopathic physician","volume":"54 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Homoeopathic physician","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.38192/1.7.2.7","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background In the middle of a pandemic, when the health and social care services were experiencing their worst challenges and staff were facing burnout, the feedback from primary care professionals raised concerns on the UK Care Quality Commission’s inspection regime and specially on its effectiveness, impact on services and particularly relating to its equality, diversity and inclusion aspects.  Methods An online anonymised survey was carried out in July 2021 and received 130 responses, the majority from the GP partners but also locum and sessional colleagues as well as other members of the general practice team. Results About 80% of respondents reported having a good rating or an outstanding rating. But fewer than 20% of the participants felt that their experience of the CQC inspections was positive. More than 85% of respondents feel that the inspections did not add value to the clinical care or prevent harm. 80% felt that the inspections were not fair, transparent, objective, or replicable and found these to be traumatic rather than being a positive or constructive experience. More than 50% felt that Practices led by Black and AsianGPs small practices and those inner city, and rural practices in areas of deprivation receive disproportionately poorer outcomes. Three in four respondents felt that the inspections were intense and took staff away from direct clinical care. Almost 86% of respondents felt that the inspectors demonstrated insights into the systemic challenges faced by primary care. About half of the respondents did not feel supported by the LMCs and/or their CCG.  Discussion & Conclusion The findings demonstrated that the inspections were not considered to be effective or constructive and took the general practice team away from patient care. Of particular concern was that perception that the system was unfair and discriminatory for Black and Asian GPs small practices and those in inner city or rural locations with multiple deprivation. The authors urge the CQC to ensure that the profession is supported and that any inspection process is fair, non-discriminatory and improves patient care. 
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
英国护理质量委员会对初级保健实践检查的看法
背景:在大流行期间,当保健和社会保健服务面临最严重的挑战,工作人员面临倦怠时,初级保健专业人员的反馈对联合王国护理质量委员会的检查制度提出了关切,特别是对其有效性、对服务的影响,特别是对其平等、多样性和包容性方面的影响。方法在线匿名调查在2021年7月,共收到了130个进行反应,大多数的医生合作伙伴还临时代理和开会的同事以及全科团队的其他成员。结果约80%的受访者给出了良好或优秀的评价。但只有不到20%的参与者认为他们的CQC检查经历是积极的。超过85%的受访者认为检查没有增加临床护理的价值或防止伤害。80%的人认为检查不公平、不透明、不客观或不可复制,并认为这些检查是创伤性的,而不是积极或建设性的经历。超过50%的人认为,在贫困地区,由黑人和亚裔的小型诊所、市中心诊所和农村诊所主导的诊所,其效果更差。四分之三的答复者认为检查是激烈的,使工作人员远离直接的临床护理。几乎86%的答复者认为,检查人员对初级保健面临的系统性挑战表现出了深刻的见解。约有一半的受访者认为没有得到地方管理公司和/或其CCG的支持。讨论与结论调查结果表明,检查不被认为是有效的或建设性的,使全科医生团队远离患者护理。特别令人关切的是,人们认为该制度对黑人和亚洲家庭医生、小型诊所以及内城或农村地区的家庭医生不公平和歧视。作者敦促CQC确保该行业得到支持,任何检查过程都是公平的,非歧视的,并改善患者护理。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Research & Innovation Abstracts The Importance of an Innovation Culture in the NHS A World Without Childhood Blindness Metacognition for Every Clinician Introduction to Artificial Intelligence Prediction for Healthcare
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1