Cargando…

Repeated analyses of national clinical audit reports demonstrate improvements in feedback methods

BACKGROUND: There is growing interest in the impact of national clinical audit programmes on the quality of healthcare. There is also an evolving evidence-base for enhancing the design and delivery of audit and feedback. We assessed the extent to which a sample of UK national clinical audit feedback...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Khan, Tasneem, Alderson, Sarah, Francis, Jill J., Lorencatto, Fabiana, Grant-Casey, John, Stanworth, Simon J., Foy, Robbie
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7691059/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33292847
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s43058-020-00089-3
_version_ 1783614208080871424
author Khan, Tasneem
Alderson, Sarah
Francis, Jill J.
Lorencatto, Fabiana
Grant-Casey, John
Stanworth, Simon J.
Foy, Robbie
author_facet Khan, Tasneem
Alderson, Sarah
Francis, Jill J.
Lorencatto, Fabiana
Grant-Casey, John
Stanworth, Simon J.
Foy, Robbie
author_sort Khan, Tasneem
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: There is growing interest in the impact of national clinical audit programmes on the quality of healthcare. There is also an evolving evidence-base for enhancing the design and delivery of audit and feedback. We assessed the extent to which a sample of UK national clinical audit feedback reports met a set of good practice criteria over three time points. METHODS: We undertook three cross-sectional content analyses. We developed good practice criteria for the content and delivery of feedback based upon evidence, behavioural theory and expert opinion. We applied these to a feedback reports from 23 national audits listed on the Healthcare Quality Improvement Partnership (HQIP) website in November 2015. We repeated our assessments in January 2017 for 20 repeat feedback reports, after HQIP had published reporting guidance for national audits, and in August 2019 for a further 14 repeat feedback reports. We verified our assessments, where possible, with audit leads. RESULTS: Feedback reports consistently included strengths at baseline, including past or planned repeated audit cycles (21; 91%), stating the importance of the topic in relation to patient care (22; 93%), using multi-modal data presentation (23; 100%), and summarising key findings (23; 100%). We observed improvements over subsequent assessments, so that by 2019, at least 13 out of 14 (93%) feedback reports presented easily identifiable key findings and recommendations, linked recommendations to audit standards, and proposed easily identifiable action plans. Whilst the use of regional comparators did not improve, audit leads highlighted that programmes now provide local data via additional means. The main shortcoming was the time lag between data collection and feedback; none of the 14 reports assessed in 2019 presented performance data less than 6 months old. Audit leads highlighted that some of these data might be available via programme websites. CONCLUSION: We identified increased adherence to good practice in feedback by national clinical audit programmes that may enhance their impact on service delivery and outcomes. There is scope for improvement, especially in the recency of performance data. With further refinements, a criterion-based assessment offers an efficient means of monitoring the quality of national clinical audit feedback reports. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s43058-020-00089-3.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7691059
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-76910592020-11-30 Repeated analyses of national clinical audit reports demonstrate improvements in feedback methods Khan, Tasneem Alderson, Sarah Francis, Jill J. Lorencatto, Fabiana Grant-Casey, John Stanworth, Simon J. Foy, Robbie Implement Sci Commun Short Report BACKGROUND: There is growing interest in the impact of national clinical audit programmes on the quality of healthcare. There is also an evolving evidence-base for enhancing the design and delivery of audit and feedback. We assessed the extent to which a sample of UK national clinical audit feedback reports met a set of good practice criteria over three time points. METHODS: We undertook three cross-sectional content analyses. We developed good practice criteria for the content and delivery of feedback based upon evidence, behavioural theory and expert opinion. We applied these to a feedback reports from 23 national audits listed on the Healthcare Quality Improvement Partnership (HQIP) website in November 2015. We repeated our assessments in January 2017 for 20 repeat feedback reports, after HQIP had published reporting guidance for national audits, and in August 2019 for a further 14 repeat feedback reports. We verified our assessments, where possible, with audit leads. RESULTS: Feedback reports consistently included strengths at baseline, including past or planned repeated audit cycles (21; 91%), stating the importance of the topic in relation to patient care (22; 93%), using multi-modal data presentation (23; 100%), and summarising key findings (23; 100%). We observed improvements over subsequent assessments, so that by 2019, at least 13 out of 14 (93%) feedback reports presented easily identifiable key findings and recommendations, linked recommendations to audit standards, and proposed easily identifiable action plans. Whilst the use of regional comparators did not improve, audit leads highlighted that programmes now provide local data via additional means. The main shortcoming was the time lag between data collection and feedback; none of the 14 reports assessed in 2019 presented performance data less than 6 months old. Audit leads highlighted that some of these data might be available via programme websites. CONCLUSION: We identified increased adherence to good practice in feedback by national clinical audit programmes that may enhance their impact on service delivery and outcomes. There is scope for improvement, especially in the recency of performance data. With further refinements, a criterion-based assessment offers an efficient means of monitoring the quality of national clinical audit feedback reports. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s43058-020-00089-3. BioMed Central 2020-11-25 /pmc/articles/PMC7691059/ /pubmed/33292847 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s43058-020-00089-3 Text en © The Author(s) 2020 Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. 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 in a credit line to the data.
spellingShingle Short Report
Khan, Tasneem
Alderson, Sarah
Francis, Jill J.
Lorencatto, Fabiana
Grant-Casey, John
Stanworth, Simon J.
Foy, Robbie
Repeated analyses of national clinical audit reports demonstrate improvements in feedback methods
title Repeated analyses of national clinical audit reports demonstrate improvements in feedback methods
title_full Repeated analyses of national clinical audit reports demonstrate improvements in feedback methods
title_fullStr Repeated analyses of national clinical audit reports demonstrate improvements in feedback methods
title_full_unstemmed Repeated analyses of national clinical audit reports demonstrate improvements in feedback methods
title_short Repeated analyses of national clinical audit reports demonstrate improvements in feedback methods
title_sort repeated analyses of national clinical audit reports demonstrate improvements in feedback methods
topic Short Report
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7691059/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33292847
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s43058-020-00089-3
work_keys_str_mv AT khantasneem repeatedanalysesofnationalclinicalauditreportsdemonstrateimprovementsinfeedbackmethods
AT aldersonsarah repeatedanalysesofnationalclinicalauditreportsdemonstrateimprovementsinfeedbackmethods
AT francisjillj repeatedanalysesofnationalclinicalauditreportsdemonstrateimprovementsinfeedbackmethods
AT lorencattofabiana repeatedanalysesofnationalclinicalauditreportsdemonstrateimprovementsinfeedbackmethods
AT grantcaseyjohn repeatedanalysesofnationalclinicalauditreportsdemonstrateimprovementsinfeedbackmethods
AT stanworthsimonj repeatedanalysesofnationalclinicalauditreportsdemonstrateimprovementsinfeedbackmethods
AT foyrobbie repeatedanalysesofnationalclinicalauditreportsdemonstrateimprovementsinfeedbackmethods