Cargando…

Evaluation of the physician quality improvement initiative: the expected and unexpected opportunities

BACKGROUND: The Physician Quality Improvement Initiative (PQII) uses a well-established multi-source feedback program, and incorporates an additional facilitated feedback review with their department chief. The purpose of this mixed methods study was to examine the value of the PQII by eliciting fee...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Wentlandt, Kirsten, Bracaglia, Andrea, Drummond, James, Handren, Lindsay, McCann, Joshua, Clarke, Catherine, Degendorfer, Niki, Chan, Charles K.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2015
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4687152/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26694493
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12909-015-0511-2
_version_ 1782406573600014336
author Wentlandt, Kirsten
Bracaglia, Andrea
Drummond, James
Handren, Lindsay
McCann, Joshua
Clarke, Catherine
Degendorfer, Niki
Chan, Charles K.
author_facet Wentlandt, Kirsten
Bracaglia, Andrea
Drummond, James
Handren, Lindsay
McCann, Joshua
Clarke, Catherine
Degendorfer, Niki
Chan, Charles K.
author_sort Wentlandt, Kirsten
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: The Physician Quality Improvement Initiative (PQII) uses a well-established multi-source feedback program, and incorporates an additional facilitated feedback review with their department chief. The purpose of this mixed methods study was to examine the value of the PQII by eliciting feedback from various stakeholders. METHODS: All participants and department chiefs (n = 45) were invited to provide feedback on the project implementation and outcomes via survey and/or an interview. The survey consisted of 12 questions focused on the value of the PQII, it’s influence on practice and the promotion of quality improvement and accountability. RESULTS: A total of 5 chiefs and 12 physician participants completed semi structured interviews. Participants found the PQII process, report and review session helpful, self-affirming or an opportunity for self-reflection, and an opportunity to engage their leaders about their practice. Chiefs indicated the sessions strengthened their understanding, ability to communicate and engage physicians about their practice, best practices, quality improvement and accountability. Thirty participants (66.7 %) completed the survey; of the responders 75.9, 89.7, 86.7 % found patient, co-worker, and physician colleague feedback valuable, respectively. A total of 67.9 % valued their facilitated review with their chief and 55.2 % indicated they were contemplating change due to their feedback. Participants believed the PQII promoted quality improvement (27/30, 90.0 %), and accountability (28/30, 93.3 %). CONCLUSIONS: The PQII provides an opportunity for physician development, affirmation and reflection, but also a structure to further departmental quality improvement, best practices, and finally, an opportunity to enhance communication, accountability and relationships between the organization, department chiefs and their staff.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4687152
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2015
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-46871522015-12-23 Evaluation of the physician quality improvement initiative: the expected and unexpected opportunities Wentlandt, Kirsten Bracaglia, Andrea Drummond, James Handren, Lindsay McCann, Joshua Clarke, Catherine Degendorfer, Niki Chan, Charles K. BMC Med Educ Research Article BACKGROUND: The Physician Quality Improvement Initiative (PQII) uses a well-established multi-source feedback program, and incorporates an additional facilitated feedback review with their department chief. The purpose of this mixed methods study was to examine the value of the PQII by eliciting feedback from various stakeholders. METHODS: All participants and department chiefs (n = 45) were invited to provide feedback on the project implementation and outcomes via survey and/or an interview. The survey consisted of 12 questions focused on the value of the PQII, it’s influence on practice and the promotion of quality improvement and accountability. RESULTS: A total of 5 chiefs and 12 physician participants completed semi structured interviews. Participants found the PQII process, report and review session helpful, self-affirming or an opportunity for self-reflection, and an opportunity to engage their leaders about their practice. Chiefs indicated the sessions strengthened their understanding, ability to communicate and engage physicians about their practice, best practices, quality improvement and accountability. Thirty participants (66.7 %) completed the survey; of the responders 75.9, 89.7, 86.7 % found patient, co-worker, and physician colleague feedback valuable, respectively. A total of 67.9 % valued their facilitated review with their chief and 55.2 % indicated they were contemplating change due to their feedback. Participants believed the PQII promoted quality improvement (27/30, 90.0 %), and accountability (28/30, 93.3 %). CONCLUSIONS: The PQII provides an opportunity for physician development, affirmation and reflection, but also a structure to further departmental quality improvement, best practices, and finally, an opportunity to enhance communication, accountability and relationships between the organization, department chiefs and their staff. BioMed Central 2015-12-22 /pmc/articles/PMC4687152/ /pubmed/26694493 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12909-015-0511-2 Text en © Wentlandt et al. 2015 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Research Article
Wentlandt, Kirsten
Bracaglia, Andrea
Drummond, James
Handren, Lindsay
McCann, Joshua
Clarke, Catherine
Degendorfer, Niki
Chan, Charles K.
Evaluation of the physician quality improvement initiative: the expected and unexpected opportunities
title Evaluation of the physician quality improvement initiative: the expected and unexpected opportunities
title_full Evaluation of the physician quality improvement initiative: the expected and unexpected opportunities
title_fullStr Evaluation of the physician quality improvement initiative: the expected and unexpected opportunities
title_full_unstemmed Evaluation of the physician quality improvement initiative: the expected and unexpected opportunities
title_short Evaluation of the physician quality improvement initiative: the expected and unexpected opportunities
title_sort evaluation of the physician quality improvement initiative: the expected and unexpected opportunities
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4687152/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26694493
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12909-015-0511-2
work_keys_str_mv AT wentlandtkirsten evaluationofthephysicianqualityimprovementinitiativetheexpectedandunexpectedopportunities
AT bracagliaandrea evaluationofthephysicianqualityimprovementinitiativetheexpectedandunexpectedopportunities
AT drummondjames evaluationofthephysicianqualityimprovementinitiativetheexpectedandunexpectedopportunities
AT handrenlindsay evaluationofthephysicianqualityimprovementinitiativetheexpectedandunexpectedopportunities
AT mccannjoshua evaluationofthephysicianqualityimprovementinitiativetheexpectedandunexpectedopportunities
AT clarkecatherine evaluationofthephysicianqualityimprovementinitiativetheexpectedandunexpectedopportunities
AT degendorferniki evaluationofthephysicianqualityimprovementinitiativetheexpectedandunexpectedopportunities
AT chancharlesk evaluationofthephysicianqualityimprovementinitiativetheexpectedandunexpectedopportunities