PubMed Health⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

F M Cheater

Publications and source records attributed to F M Cheater.

13 recordsLinked to original sources
PubMed2003

Are audits wasting resources by measuring the wrong things? A survey of methods used to select audit review criteria.

OBJECTIVES: This study measured the extent to which a systematic approach was used to select criteria for audit, and identified problems in using such an approach with potential solutions. DESIGN: A questionnaire survey using the Audit Criteria Questionnaire (ACQ), created, piloted, and validated for the purpose. Possible ACQ scores ranged from 0 to 1, indicating how systematically the criteria had been selected and how usable they were. SETTING: A stratified random sample of 10 audit leads in each of 83 randomly selected NHS trusts and all practices in each of 11 randomly selected primary care audit group areas in England and Wales. PARTICIPANTS: Audit leads of ongoing audits in each organisation in which a first data collection had started less than 12 months earlier and a second data collection was not completed. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: ACQ scores, problems identified in the audit criteria selection process, and solutions found. RESULTS: The mean ACQ score from all 83 NHS trusts and the 11 primary care audit groups was 0.52 (range 0.0-0.98). There was no difference between mean ACQ scores for criteria used in audits on clinical (0.51) and non-clinical (0.52) topics. The mean ACQ scores from nationally organised audits (0.59, n=33) was higher than for regional (0.51, n=21), local (0.53, n=77), or individual organisation (0.52, n=335) audits. The mean ACQ score for published audit protocols (0.56) was higher than for locally developed audits (0.49). There was no difference in ACQ scores for audits reported by general practices (0.49, n=83) or NHS trusts (0.53, n=383). Problems in criteria selection included difficulties in coordination of staff to undertake the task, lack of evidence, poor access to literature, poor access to high quality data, lack of time, and lack of motivation. Potential solutions include investment in training, protected time, improved access to literature, support staff and availability of published protocols. CONCLUSIONS: Methods of selecting review criteria were often less systematic than is desirable. Published usable audit protocols providing evidence based review criteria with information on their provenance enable appropriate review criteria to be selected, so that changes in practice based on these criteria lead to real improvement in quality rather than merely change. The availability and use of high quality audit protocols would be a valuable contribution to the evolution of clinical governance. The ACQ should be developed into a tool to help in selecting appropriate criteria to increase the effectiveness of audit.

England↗
PubMed2001

The Data Protection Act (1998): implications for health researchers.

AIMS: This paper reports on the methods used in two studies to obtain access to subjects to comply with the common law duty of confidence laid out in the Data Protection Act (1998) and discusses the researchers' problems in interpreting the procedures. RATIONALE: The amendments to the United Kingdom (UK) Data Protection Act (1998) are causing confusion within the health service and academic institutions. There is a need to balance patient confidentiality with the requirement to conduct vital, unbiased research in which health service professionals are not subject to ethical dilemmas. This paper examines the recruitment methods used in two studies in which the researchers' attempts to adhere to the requirements lengthened the study costs and may have produced less reliable results. METHODS: The methodological difficulties in two studies are presented. In Study 1, the difficulties encountered when the Multicentre Research Ethics Committee refused permission for researchers to recruit patients directly to a multicentre randomized controlled trial are discussed. In Study 2, the method used to compile a sampling frame for a national questionnaire survey following the eight principles of the Act are described. FINDINGS: Our experience has shown that health care professionals are increasingly required to recruit patients to intervention trials, and that researchers are not allowed access to the names of patients or other subjects to ask them for consent to participate in a study. The requirement for researchers to use "intermediaries" to obtain consent from and recruit subjects to studies increases the risk of selection bias, may expose the practitioner to ethical difficulties and may compromise the external validity of trial results. There is also a danger that research costs will soar when the Data Protection Act (1998) is fully realized. CONCLUSION: The Data Protection Act (1998) is currently being interpreted in a number of different ways. We conclude there is an urgent need for consensus within the health service and academic communities.

Clinical Trials as Topic↗
PubMed2001

An evaluation of a local clinical supervision scheme for practice nurses.

This paper presents the findings of an evaluation of a local clinical supervision scheme for practice nurses in Leicestershire, UK. A baseline and a follow-up postal questionnaire were sent to all practice nurses (including supervisors) and general practice senior partners to find out how far the objectives of the local scheme had been met during the first year of implementation. Two focus groups gathered qualitative data about the process of implementation. Twelve months after implementation 12% of practice nurses and over two thirds of GPs reported that they were unaware of the scheme. Forty-three percent of practice nurses did not know who their local supervisor was; most reported that they would like to have known. Eighteen percent of practice nurses reported uptake of supervision through the local scheme. The benefits of involvement were professional development tailored to individual learning needs and regular opportunities to share work-related problems with peers; about a third reported benefits for the practice as well. The existing availability of peer support and time needed to undertake clinical supervision were common reasons given for non-involvement in the scheme. Misconceptions about the purpose of clinical supervision presented further obstacles. At follow-up over half of the practice nurses remained undecided about their future involvement in the scheme. If the benefits associated with clinical supervision are to be realized, the obstacles that currrently hinder practice nurses' involvement need addressing.

Attitude of Health Personnel↗
PubMed2001

Expert consensus on the desirable characteristics of review criteria for improvement of health care quality.

OBJECTIVES: To identify the desirable characteristics of review criteria for quality improvement and to determine how they should be selected. BACKGROUND: Review criteria are the elements against which quality of care is assessed in quality improvement. Use of inappropriate criteria may impair the effectiveness of quality improvement activities and resources may be wasted in activities that fail to facilitate improved care. METHODS: A two round modified Delphi process was used to generate consensus amongst an international panel of 38 experts. A list of 40 characteristics of review criteria, identified from literature searches, was distributed to the experts who were asked to rate the importance and feasibility of each characteristic. Comments and suggestions for characteristics not included in the list were also invited. RESULTS: The Delphi process refined a comprehensive literature based list of 40 desirable characteristics of review criteria into a more precise list of 26 items. The expert consensus view is that review criteria should be developed through a well documented process involving consideration of valid research evidence, possibly combined with expert opinion, prioritisation according to health outcomes and strength of evidence, and pilot testing. Review criteria should also be accompanied by full clear information on how they might be used and how data might be collected and interpreted. CONCLUSION: The desirable characteristics for review criteria have been identified and will be of use in the development, evaluation, and selection of review criteria, thus improving the cost effectiveness of quality improvement activities in healthcare settings.

Consensus Statements as Topic↗
PubMed2000

Epidemiology and classification of urinary incontinence.

Urinary incontinence is a common symptom affecting the physical, psychological, social and economic well-being of individuals and their families. It also poses a considerable economic burden on health and social services. The literature reports widely varying prevalence rates for incontinence that are partially explained by methodological differences between studies. However, community-based studies indicate that approximately 6% of the population, particularly women and older people, will have urinary incontinence of sufficient severity to interfere with their quality of life. This represents a significant demand for health care. Although further research on prevalence is unlikely to add anything new to current knowledge on the size of the problem, more information is needed on the onset, progression and risk factors of urinary incontinence to inform methods of effective treatment and preventive strategies. In addition, there has been little investigation of the triggers to seeking professional help or of the response of health professionals to patients' demands for treatment, either for incontinence or other lower urinary tract symptoms. The aetiology of incontinence is multifactorial; incontinence is caused by pathophysiological impairments to the lower urinary tract and neurological system, as well as a range of external factors. The key to effective management, therefore, is a comprehensive assessment of the patient, including other lower urinary tract symptoms, so that appropriate intervention is tailored on a diagnosis and not on symptoms.

Female↗
PubMed1999

Evidence for nursing practice: a clarification of the issues.

There has been considerable confusion and unease within the nursing profession about the emphatic push for all healthcare to be 'evidence-based'. In particular, there has been anxiety that the emphasis on evidence ignores practitioners' skills and individual patient preferences. This paper attempts to clarify the main issues surrounding evidence-based nursing. These include its epidemiological origins and purpose, the meaning and limits of 'evidence', the need for individual skills and expertise in the use of evidence, and the strengths and weaknesses of different kinds of evidence. It aims to debunk the misconception that randomized controlled trials are synonymous with evidence, and to increase critical awareness of the nature of evidence in nursing.

Clinical Competence↗
PubMed1998

Nurses' participation in audit: a regional study.

OBJECTIVES: To find out to what extent nurses were perceived to be participating in audit, to identify factors thought to impede their involvement, and to assess progress towards multidisciplinary audit. RESEARCH DESIGN: Qualitative. METHODS: Focus groups and interviews. PARTICIPANTS: Chairs of audit groups and audit support staff in hospital, community and primary health care and audit leads in health authorities in the North West Region. RESULTS: In total 99 audit leads/support staff in the region participated representing 89% of the primary health care audit groups, 80% of acute hospitals, 73% of community health services, and 59% of purchasers. Many audit groups remain medically dominated despite recent changes to their structure and organisation. The quality of interprofessional relations, the leadership style of the audit chair, and nurses' level of seniority, audit knowledge, and experience influenced whether groups reflected a multidisciplinary, rather than a doctor centred approach. Nurses were perceived to be enthusiastic supporters of audit, although their active participation in the process was considered substantially less than for doctors in acute and community health services. Practice nurses were increasingly being seen as the local audit enthusiasts in primary health care. Reported obstacles to nurses' participation in audit included hierarchical nurse and doctor relationships, lack of commitment from senior doctors and managers, poor organisational links between departments of quality and audit, work load pressures and lack of protected time, availability of practical support, and lack of knowledge and skills. Progress towards multidisciplinary audit was highly variable. The undisciplinary approach to audit was still common, particularly in acute services. Multidisciplinary audit was more successfully established in areas already predisposed towards teamworking or where nurses had high involvement in decision making. Audit support staff were viewed as having a key role in helping teams to adopt a collaborative approach to audit. CONCLUSION: Although nurses were undertaking audit, and some were leading developments in their settings, a range of structural and organisational, interprofessional and intraprofessional factors was still impeding progress. If the ultimate goal of audit is to improve patient care, the obstacles that make it difficult for nurses to contribute actively to the process must be acknowledged and considered.

Clinical Competence↗
PubMed1996

Audit or research--what is the difference?

Audit and research are activities which have some characteristics in common and others which are rather different. This paper presents working definitions of each process and then examines their attributes and interrelationships in some detail. Areas covered include their purposes, what types of process they are, their theoretical bases, the methods used in each, sampling, the use of findings, confidentiality and the time frame of each. If nurses are to use or undertake research and/or audit appropriately in their practice, it is important that the similarities and differences between the two are clear.

Humans↗
PubMed1994

Utilization of nursing research: culture, interest and support.

This paper acknowledges that the successful utilization of nursing research in practice is a highly complex task. Basic requisites include a positive research culture associated with the essential interest and support needed to promote change. Within this framework factors concerned with the research culture within nursing and the NHS are considered, as well as the research-practice gap, the role of researchers, educational issues and the need for both local and national support. Comparisons are made with the more positive research culture in the USA, and some American research utilization models are mentioned. It is suggested that research is not highly regarded in the UK and that the required level of interest and support depend on nursing research becoming an expected, valued and rewarded activity. Some general suggestions for actions which should promote research utilization are made.

Diffusion of Innovation↗
PubMed1993

Retrospective document survey: identification, assessment and management of urinary incontinence in medical and care of the elderly wards.

Urinary incontinence is a common problem experienced by patients in hospital. As part of a series of studies, a retrospective survey was carried out of 229 nursing and medical records of patients identified as incontinent of urine by the nurses-in-charge, in 14 acute medical wards and 26 health care of the elderly wards. The aims of the survey were to investigate the extent to which urinary incontinence had been identified as a problem, and to examine the nature of its assessment and management. The recording of the problem was found to be inconsistent and there was a paucity of information which might have contributed towards its assessment. The causes of incontinence were rarely recorded and in approximately half of the nursing and medical records examined there was a complete absence of any information related to a management plan. Where recorded, interventions reflected predominantly palliative measures such as routine toileting regimens and the use of continence aids. The implications of these findings are discussed.

Adult↗
PubMed1992

Nurses' educational preparation and knowledge concerning continence promotion.

A survey of qualified and learner nurses was carried out in one health district in the Midlands, in England, to establish the level of their educational preparation and knowledge concerning continence management. In spite of considerable advances in the management of urinary incontinence, in recent years, pre- and post-registration education still focused predominantly upon palliative rather than therapeutic or rehabilitative nursing strategies. Results indicated that many nurses, irrespective of grade, appeared to lack sufficient knowledge about incontinence upon which informed nursing practice should be based. The implications of these findings for practice and education are discussed.

Attitude of Health Personnel↗