Search PubMed⌕ Search
Home/Archive/PubMed

PubMed · 10656070

Developing effective clinical audit.

H T Davies
View original source ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Clinical audit received a mixed press when it was formalized as part of the health-care reforms in the early 1990's, and has continued to mixed reviews ever since. However, the latest governmental stipulations on clinical governance envisage a revitalized role for clinical audit. This paper advises on avoiding some of the pitfalls that await the unwary in developing effective clinical audit projects.

Explore related subjects

Data CollectionHumansMedical AuditOrganizational InnovationProblem SolvingState MedicineUnited KingdomJournal Article

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

H T Davies. 1999. Developing effective clinical audit.. https://doi.org/10.12968/hosp.1999.60.10.1221

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

PubMed2001

Screening and intervention for illicit drug abuse: a national survey of primary care physicians and psychiatrists.

BACKGROUND: Illicit drug abuse causes much morbidity and mortality, yet little is known about physicians' screening and intervention practices regarding illicit drug abuse. METHODS: We mailed a survey to a national sample of 2000 practicing general internists, family physicians, obstetricians and gynecologists, and psychiatrists to assess their screening and intervention practices for illicit drug abuse. RESULTS: Of 1082 respondents (adjusted response rate, 57%), 68% reported that they regularly ask new outpatients about drug use. For diagnosed illicit drug abuse, 55% reported that they routinely offer formal treatment referral, but 15% reported that they do not intervene. In multivariate logistic regression models, more optimal screening and intervention practices were associated with psychiatry specialty, confidence in obtaining the history of drug use, optimism about the effectiveness of therapy, less concern that patients will object, and fewer perceived time constraints. CONCLUSIONS: Most physicians reported that they ask patients about illicit drug use, but a substantial minority inadequately intervene in diagnosed drug abuse. Initiatives to promote physician involvement in illicit drug abuse should include strategies to increase physicians' confidence in managing drug problems, engender optimism about the benefits of treatment, dispel concerns about patients' sensitivity regarding substance use, and address perceived time limitations.

Data Collection↗
PubMed2001

Adequacy of fellowship training: results of a survey of recently graduated fellows.

The adequacy of fellowship training in the field of infectious diseases was assessed by means of a survey of recently graduated fellows. Surveys were mailed to all individuals who had passed the American Board of Internal Medicine's board certification examination in infectious diseases since 1992. A total of 666 completed surveys were returned by the deadline (response rate, 36%). Although most recent graduates thought that training in the standard components of clinical infectious diseases was adequate, only 50% thought that training in infection control was adequate. Fewer than 1 in 3 believed that they had received adequate training in the business aspects of infectious diseases practice. The adequacy and duration of research training were linked to ultimate career choice. These results form the basis for the Infectious Diseases Society of America's new initiatives to assist with more-diversified and relevant fellowship training.

Data Collection↗
PubMed2001

Protecting the privacy of family members in survey and pedigree research.

The recent controversy at Virginia Commonwealth University involving research ethics raises important and complex issues in survey and pedigree research. The primary questions are whether family members of survey respondents themselves become subjects of the project and if they are subjects whether informed consent must be obtained for investigators to retain private information on these individuals. This article provides an analysis of the ethical issues and regulatory standards involved in this debate for consideration by investigators and institutional review boards. The analysis suggests that strong protections for the rights and welfare of subjects and their family members can be incorporated into survey and pedigree research protocols without hindering projects with extensive consent requirements.

Data Collection↗