Cargando…

Embedded trials within national clinical audit programmes: A qualitative interview study of enablers and barriers

BACKGROUND: Audit and feedback entails systematic documentation of clinical performance based on explicit criteria or standards which is then fed back to professionals in a structured manner. There are potential significant returns on investment from partnerships between existing clinical audit prog...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Alderson, Sarah, Willis, Thomas A, Wood, Su, Lorencatto, Fabiana, Francis, Jill, Ivers, Noah, Grimshaw, Jeremy, Foy, Robbie
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: SAGE Publications 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8772016/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34886697
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/13558196211044321
_version_ 1784635751187611648
author Alderson, Sarah
Willis, Thomas A
Wood, Su
Lorencatto, Fabiana
Francis, Jill
Ivers, Noah
Grimshaw, Jeremy
Foy, Robbie
author_facet Alderson, Sarah
Willis, Thomas A
Wood, Su
Lorencatto, Fabiana
Francis, Jill
Ivers, Noah
Grimshaw, Jeremy
Foy, Robbie
author_sort Alderson, Sarah
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Audit and feedback entails systematic documentation of clinical performance based on explicit criteria or standards which is then fed back to professionals in a structured manner. There are potential significant returns on investment from partnerships between existing clinical audit programmes in coordinated programmes of research to test ways of improving the effect of their feedback to drive greater improvements in health care delivery and population outcomes. We explored barriers to and enablers of embedding audit and feedback trials within clinical audit programmes. METHODS: We purposively recruited participants with varied experience in embedded trials in audit programmes. We conducted qualitative semi-structured interviews, guided by behavioural theory, with researchers, clinical audit programme staff and health care professionals. Recorded interviews were transcribed, and data coded and thematically analysed. RESULTS: We interviewed 31 participants (9 feedback researchers, 14 audit staff and 8 healthcare professionals, many having dual roles). We identified barriers and enablers for all 14 theoretical domains but no relationship between domains and participant role. We identified four optimal conditions for sustainable collaboration from the perspectives of stakeholders: resources, that is, recognition that audit programmes need to create capacity to participate in research, and research must be adapted to fit within each programme’s constraints; logistics, namely, that partnerships need to address data sharing and audit quality, while securing research funding to ensure operational success; leadership, that is, enthusiastic and engaged audit programme leaders must motivate their team and engage local stakeholders; and relationships, meaning that trust between researchers and audit programmes must be established over time by identifying shared priorities and meeting each partner’s needs. CONCLUSION: Successfully embedding research within clinical audit programmes is likely to require compromise, logistical expertise, leadership and trusting relationships to overcome perceived risks and fully realise benefits.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8772016
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher SAGE Publications
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-87720162022-01-21 Embedded trials within national clinical audit programmes: A qualitative interview study of enablers and barriers Alderson, Sarah Willis, Thomas A Wood, Su Lorencatto, Fabiana Francis, Jill Ivers, Noah Grimshaw, Jeremy Foy, Robbie J Health Serv Res Policy Original Researchs BACKGROUND: Audit and feedback entails systematic documentation of clinical performance based on explicit criteria or standards which is then fed back to professionals in a structured manner. There are potential significant returns on investment from partnerships between existing clinical audit programmes in coordinated programmes of research to test ways of improving the effect of their feedback to drive greater improvements in health care delivery and population outcomes. We explored barriers to and enablers of embedding audit and feedback trials within clinical audit programmes. METHODS: We purposively recruited participants with varied experience in embedded trials in audit programmes. We conducted qualitative semi-structured interviews, guided by behavioural theory, with researchers, clinical audit programme staff and health care professionals. Recorded interviews were transcribed, and data coded and thematically analysed. RESULTS: We interviewed 31 participants (9 feedback researchers, 14 audit staff and 8 healthcare professionals, many having dual roles). We identified barriers and enablers for all 14 theoretical domains but no relationship between domains and participant role. We identified four optimal conditions for sustainable collaboration from the perspectives of stakeholders: resources, that is, recognition that audit programmes need to create capacity to participate in research, and research must be adapted to fit within each programme’s constraints; logistics, namely, that partnerships need to address data sharing and audit quality, while securing research funding to ensure operational success; leadership, that is, enthusiastic and engaged audit programme leaders must motivate their team and engage local stakeholders; and relationships, meaning that trust between researchers and audit programmes must be established over time by identifying shared priorities and meeting each partner’s needs. CONCLUSION: Successfully embedding research within clinical audit programmes is likely to require compromise, logistical expertise, leadership and trusting relationships to overcome perceived risks and fully realise benefits. SAGE Publications 2021-12-09 2022-01 /pmc/articles/PMC8772016/ /pubmed/34886697 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/13558196211044321 Text en © The Author(s) 2021 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) which permits any use, reproduction and distribution of the work without further permission provided the original work is attributed as specified on the SAGE and Open Access page (https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/open-access-at-sage).
spellingShingle Original Researchs
Alderson, Sarah
Willis, Thomas A
Wood, Su
Lorencatto, Fabiana
Francis, Jill
Ivers, Noah
Grimshaw, Jeremy
Foy, Robbie
Embedded trials within national clinical audit programmes: A qualitative interview study of enablers and barriers
title Embedded trials within national clinical audit programmes: A qualitative interview study of enablers and barriers
title_full Embedded trials within national clinical audit programmes: A qualitative interview study of enablers and barriers
title_fullStr Embedded trials within national clinical audit programmes: A qualitative interview study of enablers and barriers
title_full_unstemmed Embedded trials within national clinical audit programmes: A qualitative interview study of enablers and barriers
title_short Embedded trials within national clinical audit programmes: A qualitative interview study of enablers and barriers
title_sort embedded trials within national clinical audit programmes: a qualitative interview study of enablers and barriers
topic Original Researchs
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8772016/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34886697
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/13558196211044321
work_keys_str_mv AT aldersonsarah embeddedtrialswithinnationalclinicalauditprogrammesaqualitativeinterviewstudyofenablersandbarriers
AT willisthomasa embeddedtrialswithinnationalclinicalauditprogrammesaqualitativeinterviewstudyofenablersandbarriers
AT woodsu embeddedtrialswithinnationalclinicalauditprogrammesaqualitativeinterviewstudyofenablersandbarriers
AT lorencattofabiana embeddedtrialswithinnationalclinicalauditprogrammesaqualitativeinterviewstudyofenablersandbarriers
AT francisjill embeddedtrialswithinnationalclinicalauditprogrammesaqualitativeinterviewstudyofenablersandbarriers
AT iversnoah embeddedtrialswithinnationalclinicalauditprogrammesaqualitativeinterviewstudyofenablersandbarriers
AT grimshawjeremy embeddedtrialswithinnationalclinicalauditprogrammesaqualitativeinterviewstudyofenablersandbarriers
AT foyrobbie embeddedtrialswithinnationalclinicalauditprogrammesaqualitativeinterviewstudyofenablersandbarriers