PubMed Health⌕ Search
Home/Archive/PubMed

PubMed · 16548404

Research, audit and quality improvement.

Roger Paxton·Paula Whitty·Ali Zaatar·Andrew Fairbairn·Jane Lothian
View original source ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

PURPOSE: The purpose of this article is to clarify the distinction between research and audit, and propose appropriate regulatory arrangements for audit and related activities. DESIGN/METHODOLOGY/APPROACH: The methods used were literature reviews and conceptual analysis. FINDINGS: Research and audit overlap in various ways, but differ in terms of their purposes and the risks likely to be encountered and distinguished, along with a third related category of activities called quality improvement. PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS: Appropriate regulatory arrangements are proposed for audit and quality improvement activities. Using these should ensure appropriate ethical standards and risk management, while avoiding the time-consuming over-regulation that occurs when projects are unnecessarily submitted to the ethical scrutiny appropriate for research projects. ORIGINALITY/VALUE: Gives suggestions and information that could be of great value in spreading service improvement.

Explore related subjects

Health Services AdministrationHealth Services ResearchHumansManagement AuditMedical AuditOrganizational ObjectivesTotal Quality ManagementComparative StudyJournal Article

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Roger Paxton, Paula Whitty, Ali Zaatar, Andrew Fairbairn, Jane Lothian. 2006. Research, audit and quality improvement.. https://doi.org/10.1108/09526860610642627

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

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

PubMed2006

Straight talk new approaches to healthcare. The healthcare quality equation.

Though various health organizations may define and approach quality differently, the common denominator is the patient's perspective, experience and outcome. Quality issues should be an important part of health system executives' agenda. Successful quality programs have a number of key ingredients, including decision-reporting tools and business analytics information--which depend on robust information reporting and a system-wide electronic medical record--as well as highly motivated employees and physicians. In this installment of Straight Talk, representatives from two health systems--Kaiser Permanente and Clarian Health Partners--discuss their quality initiatives.

Health Services Administration↗
PubMed2006

The evaluation of health and social care partnerships: an analysis of approaches and synthesis for the future.

At a time when health and social care partnerships are continuing to occupy a central role within the UK government's policy strategy, researchers are increasingly being required to evaluate such organisational entities. This paper looks at a wide range of approaches which have been utilised to evaluate health and social care partnerships, and suggests that theory-led strategies are better able to address the complexities associated with such forms of evaluation. In particular, the author suggests that a combination of theories of change and realistic evaluation seems to be the most fruitful in tackling the evaluation difficulties associated with partnerships. Despite both being theory-led evaluation strategies, they fulfil quite different and complementary roles. However, both these approaches have been found to have some limitations in practice. Therefore, this paper suggests that interpreting these approaches through a framework of critical realism may overcome a number of these difficulties.

Health Services Administration↗
PubMed2006

Developing inclusive partnerships: user-defined outcomes, networking and knowledge--a case study.

Two major developments have been associated with the reorientation of United Kingdom health and social care policy and provision in recent years, placing a new emphasis on: quality and 'outcome' measures; and service user (and public and patient) involvement. These issues have become central to health and social care, representing expressions of the shift in political and ideological interest in public policy. However, these two strands of development have tended to be treated as discrete discourses and have developed separately in policy. Nevertheless, it can hardly be assumed that what policy makers, service planners, providers and purchasers would value and prioritise as good quality would necessarily coincide with what service users would want. Developing effective partnership working needs to go beyond considerations of organisations and professional groupings, and fully involve service users as one of the key stakeholders. This paper describes the findings of three projects undertaken by Shaping Our Lives. These studies confirmed that service-user concepts of outcomes and quality may differ significantly from those currently employed; moreover, service users are able to offer a complex and sophisticated model of what outcome measures might look like if they were centrally involved in their definition and application. Nevertheless, service users currently have little impact in defining and influencing quality outcomes. The projects also highlight the importance of networking and knowledge sharing for service users and user organisations in their ability to influence policy definitions of quality, and a number of the barriers and obstacles which undermine this process. The paper concludes with two proposals which, considered together, offer the basis for taking forward effective and inclusive partnerships and developing measures for quality consistent with the rights and preferences of service users themselves. They are an essential complement to broader efforts and strategies to develop effective partnerships in health and social care.

Health Services Administration↗