在小规模初级保健实践中建立改进项目:持续质量改进模式的可行性。

H Geboers, M van der Horst, H Mokkink, P van Montfort, W van den Bosch, H van den Hoogen, R Grol
{"title":"在小规模初级保健实践中建立改进项目:持续质量改进模式的可行性。","authors":"H Geboers,&nbsp;M van der Horst,&nbsp;H Mokkink,&nbsp;P van Montfort,&nbsp;W van den Bosch,&nbsp;H van den Hoogen,&nbsp;R Grol","doi":"10.1136/qshc.8.1.36","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To evaluate the feasibility of a model for continuous quality improvement in small scale general practice and the improvement projects that practices ran after the introduction of continuous quality improvement.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>A descriptive study.</p><p><strong>Setting: </strong>Twenty general practices in the Netherlands tested the model in an intervention period of 18 months.</p><p><strong>Intervention: </strong>A model for continuous quality improvement adapted for general practice was introduced into the practices using a structured strategy. Practices were supported by trained facilitators.</p><p><strong>Main outcome measures: </strong>Acceptance at introduction and continued application of the model; the topics of improvement projects that were set up in the practices; whether the improvement projects had been completed; whether they had met the criteria (the use of the \"quality cycle\" and the Oxford audit score); and whether the self set objectives had been met.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The model was introduced and accepted in all participating practices. Practices started 51 improvement projects. At the end of the study period 33 improvement projects had been completed. Practices chose a wide variety of objectives for these projects; most of them concerned medical or organisational topics. Practices started projects mainly because the topic was felt to be a problem or was causing a bottleneck in the organisation. The quality cycle was used in all projects, but practices did not always collect data and evaluate the outcomes. Fourteen projects could be discerned as \"full audit\". No differences existed in the quality of improvement projects among the various types of practice or between the topics addressed. At the end of the study period half of the practices continued applying the model.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This study showed that the model was feasible for small scale general practice. However, application of the model tended to disintegrate after the facilitator had left the practice. Practices succeeded reasonably well in running improvement projects. Introduction of continuous quality improvement should particularly focus on this. It is suggested that intensive support is necessary to implement and maintain continuous quality improvement in small scale practices.</p>","PeriodicalId":20773,"journal":{"name":"Quality in health care : QHC","volume":"8 1","pages":"36-42"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1999-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1136/qshc.8.1.36","citationCount":"41","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Setting up improvement projects in small scale primary care practices: feasibility of a model for continuous quality improvement.\",\"authors\":\"H Geboers,&nbsp;M van der Horst,&nbsp;H Mokkink,&nbsp;P van Montfort,&nbsp;W van den Bosch,&nbsp;H van den Hoogen,&nbsp;R Grol\",\"doi\":\"10.1136/qshc.8.1.36\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To evaluate the feasibility of a model for continuous quality improvement in small scale general practice and the improvement projects that practices ran after the introduction of continuous quality improvement.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>A descriptive study.</p><p><strong>Setting: </strong>Twenty general practices in the Netherlands tested the model in an intervention period of 18 months.</p><p><strong>Intervention: </strong>A model for continuous quality improvement adapted for general practice was introduced into the practices using a structured strategy. Practices were supported by trained facilitators.</p><p><strong>Main outcome measures: </strong>Acceptance at introduction and continued application of the model; the topics of improvement projects that were set up in the practices; whether the improvement projects had been completed; whether they had met the criteria (the use of the \\\"quality cycle\\\" and the Oxford audit score); and whether the self set objectives had been met.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The model was introduced and accepted in all participating practices. Practices started 51 improvement projects. At the end of the study period 33 improvement projects had been completed. Practices chose a wide variety of objectives for these projects; most of them concerned medical or organisational topics. Practices started projects mainly because the topic was felt to be a problem or was causing a bottleneck in the organisation. The quality cycle was used in all projects, but practices did not always collect data and evaluate the outcomes. Fourteen projects could be discerned as \\\"full audit\\\". No differences existed in the quality of improvement projects among the various types of practice or between the topics addressed. At the end of the study period half of the practices continued applying the model.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This study showed that the model was feasible for small scale general practice. However, application of the model tended to disintegrate after the facilitator had left the practice. Practices succeeded reasonably well in running improvement projects. Introduction of continuous quality improvement should particularly focus on this. It is suggested that intensive support is necessary to implement and maintain continuous quality improvement in small scale practices.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":20773,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Quality in health care : QHC\",\"volume\":\"8 1\",\"pages\":\"36-42\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"1999-03-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1136/qshc.8.1.36\",\"citationCount\":\"41\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Quality in health care : QHC\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1136/qshc.8.1.36\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Quality in health care : QHC","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1136/qshc.8.1.36","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 41

摘要

目的:评价小规模全科医疗持续质量改进模式的可行性,以及引入持续质量改进后实施的改进项目。设计:描述性研究。背景:荷兰的20家全科医院在18个月的干预期内对该模型进行了测试。干预:使用结构化策略将适用于一般实践的持续质量改进模型引入实践。实践得到训练有素的辅导员的支持。主要结果测量:模型引入时的接受度和持续应用;在实践中设立的改进项目主题;改善工程是否已完成;他们是否达到了标准(使用“质量周期”和牛津审计评分);以及是否达到了自己设定的目标。结果:该模型在各参与实践中均被引入并接受。实践启动了51个改进项目。在研究期间结束时,已经完成了33个改进项目。实践为这些项目选择了各种各样的目标;其中大多数涉及医疗或组织主题。实践开始项目主要是因为这个主题被认为是一个问题,或者在组织中造成了瓶颈。所有的项目都使用了质量周期,但是实践并不总是收集数据并评估结果。14个项目可被认定为“全面审计”。在不同类型的实践之间或所讨论的主题之间,改进项目的质量不存在差异。在研究期结束时,一半的实践继续应用该模型。结论:本研究表明该模型适用于小规模全科医疗。然而,在推动者离开实践后,该模型的应用趋于瓦解。实践在运行改进项目方面相当成功。引入持续质量改进应特别关注这一点。建议在小规模实践中实施和保持持续的质量改进需要密集的支持。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Setting up improvement projects in small scale primary care practices: feasibility of a model for continuous quality improvement.

Objectives: To evaluate the feasibility of a model for continuous quality improvement in small scale general practice and the improvement projects that practices ran after the introduction of continuous quality improvement.

Design: A descriptive study.

Setting: Twenty general practices in the Netherlands tested the model in an intervention period of 18 months.

Intervention: A model for continuous quality improvement adapted for general practice was introduced into the practices using a structured strategy. Practices were supported by trained facilitators.

Main outcome measures: Acceptance at introduction and continued application of the model; the topics of improvement projects that were set up in the practices; whether the improvement projects had been completed; whether they had met the criteria (the use of the "quality cycle" and the Oxford audit score); and whether the self set objectives had been met.

Results: The model was introduced and accepted in all participating practices. Practices started 51 improvement projects. At the end of the study period 33 improvement projects had been completed. Practices chose a wide variety of objectives for these projects; most of them concerned medical or organisational topics. Practices started projects mainly because the topic was felt to be a problem or was causing a bottleneck in the organisation. The quality cycle was used in all projects, but practices did not always collect data and evaluate the outcomes. Fourteen projects could be discerned as "full audit". No differences existed in the quality of improvement projects among the various types of practice or between the topics addressed. At the end of the study period half of the practices continued applying the model.

Conclusion: This study showed that the model was feasible for small scale general practice. However, application of the model tended to disintegrate after the facilitator had left the practice. Practices succeeded reasonably well in running improvement projects. Introduction of continuous quality improvement should particularly focus on this. It is suggested that intensive support is necessary to implement and maintain continuous quality improvement in small scale practices.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Engaging patients in decisions: a challenge to health care delivery and public health. The extent of patients' understanding of the risk of treatments. Preferences and understanding their effects on health. Evidence-based patient empowerment. Performance management at the crossroads in the NHS: don't go into the red.
×
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