hh.sePublications
Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
How do healthcare providers use national audit data for improvement?
National Institute of Health Research (NIHR), London, United Kingdom; Imperial College Business School, London, United Kingdom.ORCID iD: 0000-0001-7742-8003
King's College London, London, United Kingdom.ORCID iD: 0000-0002-4109-9970
Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom.ORCID iD: 0000-0002-0005-9710
Halmstad University, School of Health and Welfare. Julie Reed Consultancy Ltd, London, United Kingdom.ORCID iD: 0000-0002-9974-2017
2023 (English)In: BMC Health Services Research, E-ISSN 1472-6963, Vol. 23, no 1, article id 393Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Background: Substantial resources are invested by Health Departments worldwide in introducing National Clinical Audits (NCAs). Yet, there is variable evidence on the NCAs’ effectiveness and little is known on factors underlying the successful use of NCAs to improve local practice. This study will focus on a single NCA (the National Audit of Inpatient Falls -NAIF 2017) to explore: (i) participants’ perspectives on the NCA reports, local feedback characteristics and actions undertaken following the feedback underpinning the effective use of the NCA feedback to improve local practice; (ii) reported changes in local practice following the NCA feedback in England and Wales. Methods: Front-line staff perspectives were gathered through interviews. An inductive qualitative approach was used. Eighteen participants were purposefully sampled from 7 of the 85 participating hospitals in England and Wales. Analysis was guided by constant comparative techniques. Results: Regarding the NAIF annual report, interviewees valued performance benchmarking with other hospitals, the use of visual representations and the inclusion of case studies and recommendations. Participants stated that feedback should target front-line healthcare professionals, be straightforward and focused, and be delivered through an encouraging and honest discussion. Interviewees highlighted the value of using other relevant data sources alongside NAIF feedback and the importance of continuous data monitoring. Participants reported that engagement of front-line staff in the NAIF and following improvement activities was critical. Leadership, ownership, management support and communication at different organisational levels were perceived as enablers, while staffing level and turnover, and poor quality improvement (QI) skills, were perceived as barriers to improvement. Reported changes in practice included increased awareness and attention to patient safety issues and greater involvement of patients and staff in falls prevention activities. Conclusions: There is scope to improve the use of NCAs by front-line staff. NCAs should not be seen as isolated interventions but should be fully embedded and integrated into the QI strategic and operational plans of NHS trusts. The use of NCAs could be optimised, but knowledge of them is poor and distributed unevenly across different disciplines. More research is needed to provide guidance on key elements to consider throughout the whole improvement process at different organisational levels. © 2023, The Author(s).

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
London: BioMed Central (BMC), 2023. Vol. 23, no 1, article id 393
Keywords [en]
Audit, Feedback, Health care improvement, Inpatient falls, National clinical audit, Quality improvement
National Category
Obstetrics, Gynecology and Reproductive Medicine
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:hh:diva-51398DOI: 10.1186/s12913-023-09334-6ISI: 000975950400005PubMedID: 37095495Scopus ID: 2-s2.0-85153687421OAI: oai:DiVA.org:hh-51398DiVA, id: diva2:1788048
Note

Funding: The study was funded by the Falls and Fragility Fracture Audit Programme. This report is independent research supported by the National Institute for Health and Care Research Applied Research Collaboration Northwest London. 

Available from: 2023-08-15 Created: 2023-08-15 Last updated: 2023-08-16Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text in DiVA

Other links

Publisher's full textPubMedScopus

Authority records

Reed, Julie

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Antonacci, GraziaWhitney, JulieHarris, MatthewReed, Julie
By organisation
School of Health and Welfare
In the same journal
BMC Health Services Research
Obstetrics, Gynecology and Reproductive Medicine

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn
Total: 57 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf