首页> 外文期刊>British Medical Journal >Identifying predictors of high quality care in English general practice: observational study
【24h】

Identifying predictors of high quality care in English general practice: observational study

机译:识别英语普通实践中高质量护理的预测因素:观察性研究

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
       

摘要

Objectives To assess variation in the quality of care in general practice and identify factors associated with high quality care. Design Observational study. Setting Stratified random sample of 60 general practices in six areas of England. Outcome measures Quality of management of chronic disease (angina, asthma in adults, and type 2 diabetes) and preventive care (rates of uptake for immunisation and cervical smear), access to care, continuity of care, and interpersonal care (general practice assessment survey). Multiple logistic regression with multilevel modelling was used to relate each of the outcome variables to practice size, routine booking interval for consultations, socioeconomic deprivation, and team climate. Results Quality of clinical care varied substantially, and access to care, continuity of care, and interpersonal care varied moderately. Scores for asthma, diabetes, and angina were 67%, 21%, and 17% higher in practices with 10 minute booking intervals for consultations compared with practices with five minute booking intervals. Diabetes care was better in larger practices and in practices where staff reported better team climate. Access to care was better in small practices. Preventive care was worse in practices located in socioeconomically deprived areas. Scores for satisfaction, continuity of care, and access to care were higher in practices where staff reported better team climate. Conclusions Longer consultation times are essential for providing high quality clinical care. Good teamworking is a key part of providing high quality care across a range of areas and may need specific support if quality of care is to be improved. Additional support is needed to provide preventive care to deprived populations. No single type of practice has a monopoly on high quality care: different types of practice may have different strengths.
机译:目的评估一般实践中护理质量的差异,并确定与高质量护理相关的因素。设计观察研究。对英格兰六个地区的60种常规做法进行分层随机抽样。成果指标慢性病(成人心绞痛,成人哮喘和2型糖尿病)和预防保健(免疫接种和子宫颈涂片的摄取率),获得护理,护理的连续性和人际护理(一般实践评估调查)的管理质量)。使用具有多级建模的多元逻辑回归将每个结果变量与实践规模,咨询的常规预约间隔,社会经济剥夺和团队氛围相关联。结果临床护理质量差异很大,获得护理,护理连续性和人际护理的差异也较小。预约间隔为10分钟的执业医师的气喘,糖尿病和心绞痛评分分别比预约间隔为5分钟的患者高67%,21%和17%。在更大范围的实践中以及在员工报告的团队氛围更好的实践中,糖尿病护理效果更好。在小规模实践中,获得医疗服务更好。在社会经济贫困地区的实践中,预防保健的情况更糟。在员工报告的团队氛围更好的实践中,满意度,护理连续性和获得护理的分数更高。结论更长的咨询时间对于提供高质量的临床护理至关重要。良好的团队合作是在多个领域提供高质量护理的关键部分,如果要改善护理质量,可能需要特殊的支持。需要更多的支持,以向贫困人口提供预防保健。没有一种单一的做法可以垄断高质量的护理服务:不同类型的做法可能具有不同的优势。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号