Adapting total quality management for general practice: evaluation of a programme.
(1/354)
OBJECTIVE: Assessment of the benefits and limitations of a quality improvement programme based on total quality management principles in general practice over a period of one year (October 1993-4). DESIGN: Questionnaires to practice team members before any intervention and after one year. Three progress reports completed by facilitators at four month intervals. Semistructured interviews with a sample of staff from each practice towards the end of the year. SETTING: 18 self selected practices from across the former Oxford Region. Three members of each practice received an initial residential course and three one day seminars during the year. Each practice was supported by a facilitator from their Medical Audit Advisory Group. MEASURES: Extent of understanding and implementation of quality improvement methodology. Number, completeness, and evaluation of quality improvement projects. Practice team members' attitudes to and involvement in team working and quality improvement. RESULTS: 16 of the 18 practices succeeded in implementing the quality improvement methods. 48 initiatives were considered and staff involvement was broad. Practice members showed increased involvement in, and appreciation of, strategic planning and team working, and satisfaction from improved patients services. 11 of the practices intend to continue with the methodology. The commonest barrier expressed was time. CONCLUSION: Quality improvement programmes based on total quality management principles produce beneficial changes in service delivery and team working in most general practices. It is incompatible with traditional doctor centred practice. The methodology needs to be adapted for primary care to avoid quality improvement being seen as separate from routine activity, and to save time. (+info)
Theoretical framework for implementing a managed care curriculum for continuing medical education--Part I.
(2/354)
Healthcare reform has created a new working environment for practicing physicians, as economic issues have become inseparably intertwined with clinical practice. Although physicians have recognized this change, and some are returning to school for formal education in business and healthcare administration, formal education may not be practical or desirable for the majority of practicing physicians. Other curriculum models to meet the needs of these professionals should be considered, particularly given the growing interest in continuing education for physicians in the areas of managed care and related aspects of practice management. Currently, no theory-based models for implementing a managed care curriculum specifically for working physicians have been developed. This paper will integrate diffusion theory, instructional systems design theory, and learning theory as they apply to the implementation of a managed care curriculum for continuing medical education. Through integration of theory with practical application, a CME curriculum for practicing physicians can be both innovative as well as effective. This integration offers the benefit of educational programs within the context of realistic situations that physicians can apply to their own work settings. (+info)
Application of the problem-based learning model for continuing professional education: a continuing medical education program on managed care issues--Part II.
(3/354)
Physicians must incorporate concepts of practice management and knowledge of managed care into their practices. Managed care presents an immediate and challenging opportunity to providers of continuing medical education to offer effective educational programs for physicians on managed care issues. In this exploratory research, the problem-based learning model was used to develop a continuing medical education program that would offer an interactive and effective method for teaching physicians about managed care. Problem-based learning is a departure from the traditional lecture format of continuing medical education programs because it is designed for small groups of self-directed learners who are guided by a faculty facilitator. Although only a small number of participants participated in this program, the findings offer important considerations for providers of continuing medical education. For example, participants reported increased confidence in their knowledge about managed care issues. Participants also clearly indicated a preference for the small group, interactive format of the problem-based learning model. (+info)
Assessment of management in general practice: validation of a practice visit method.
(4/354)
BACKGROUND: Practice management (PM) in general practice is as yet ill-defined; a systematic description of its domain, as well as a valid method to assess it, are necessary for research and assessment. AIM: To develop and validate a method to assess PM of general practitioners (GPs) and practices. METHOD: Relevant and potentially discriminating indicators were selected from a systematic framework of 2410 elements of PM to be used in an assessment method (VIP = visit instrument PM). The method was first tested in a pilot study and, after revision, was evaluated in order to select discriminating indicators and to determine validity of dimensions (factor and reliability analysis, linear regression). RESULTS: One hundred and ten GPs were assessed with the practice visit method using 249 indicators; 208 of these discriminated sufficiently at practice level or at GP level. Factor analysis resulted in 34 dimensions and in a taxonomy of PM. Dimensions and indicators showed marked variation between GPs and practices. Training practices scored higher on five dimensions; single-handed and dispensing practices scored lower on delegated tasks, but higher on accessibility and availability. CONCLUSION: A visit method to assess PM has been developed and its validity studied systematically. The taxonomy and dimensions of PM were in line with other classifications. Selection of a balanced number of useful and relevant indicators was nevertheless difficult. The dimensions could discriminate between groups of GPs and practices, establishing the value of the method for assessment. The VIP method could be an important contribution to the introduction of continuous quality improvement in the profession. (+info)
Time for a change? The process of lengthening booking intervals in general practice.
(5/354)
Longer booking intervals between appointments in general practice are generally seen as 'a good thing', and have a strong 'evidence base' to support them. Changing to longer booking intervals is regarded as a pipe dream by many general practitioners (GPs). This paper reports the process and outcomes of a change to longer booking intervals in one practice, identifies the key elements of the change, and examines lessons learned for the practice, to help other practices to do similarly. The most important factor in bringing about change was the influence of facilitation by outside parties; first, by management consultants who identified solutions to the practice's problems, and secondly, by recruitment to a research study. Other outside influences were an awareness of the success of other practices in changing to 10-minute booking intervals, and the increasing 'evidence base' to support such change. Internal influences on the process were a desire to change as a result a perception that the practice was under-performing, and the stress associated with this. As a result of the change, the number of doctor consultations fell and the number of nurse consultations rose, fewer patients reconsulted, and marginal improvements were reported on doctor and patient satisfaction. Other practices may benefit from such change; the use of management consultants as facilitators may instigate such change. (+info)
Strategies to improve cancer screening in general practice: are guidelines the answer?
(6/354)
BACKGROUND: GPs are ideally placed to recommend appropriate cancer screening for their patients. However, opportunities to discuss screening are often missed and screening procedures are not always recommended in accordance with national policy. The development of clinical practice guidelines represents one strategy for improving cancer screening in general practice. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to ascertain Australian GPs' ratings of current clinical practice guidelines and their views of the likely usefulness of 18 strategies to improve cancer screening in general practice. METHOD: A self-administered questionnaire was mailed to a national random sample of 1271 GPs in May 1996. Responders rated the usefulness of each of eight clinical practice guidelines current at the time of the survey. They then rated the usefulness of each of 18 strategies for support of cancer screening. RESULTS: We received 855 completed questionnaires (a 67% response rate). There was greatest support for guidelines already available on breast and cervical cancer. The most popular strategy to improve cancer screening was seminars with experts in preventive care, rated as 'very useful' by 658 (77%), followed by NHMRC guidelines (597, 70%) and pamphlets for patients (587, 69%). There was less support for more innovative strategies including assessment and feedback (35%), case finding by nurse practitioners (11%) and academic detailing (10%). CONCLUSION: Responders indicated that strategies involving passive dissemination of information would be most useful for improving cancer screening in general practice. Identification of an effective combination of acceptable initiatives is needed. (+info)
Do postal questionnaires change GPs' workload and referral patterns?
(7/354)
OBJECTIVE: We aimed to determine changes in workload in general practice associated with the postal administration of a health needs questionnaire. METHOD: We carried out controlled before-and-after intervention study of the effects of delivering a postal questionnaire to assess needs for care for patients with arthropathies of the hip and knee, groin hernia and varicose veins, and to assess health service utilization, general health status and risk factors for cardiovascular disease. The setting was a seven-partner, fundholding, group practice in Avon. The subjects were patients registered with an NHS group practice situated in Backwell and Nailsea, Avon. The outcome measures were the frequency of consultation, home visits and night visits, reasons for consultation, referral to specialist agencies and patterns of prescribing. RESULTS: There was no significant difference between the study and control group in the year before and the year after the postal administration of the questionnaire with respect to changes in overall frequency of consultation, frequency of referral (including type of referral) and frequency of prescribing of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs. In the study group there was a significant (P<0.05) reduction in the number of daytime home visits and prescriptions written for analgesics. Analysis of the records of those who had received a medical examination, in addition to a postal questionnaire, showed that there was no significant difference between the study and control group with respect to frequency of consultation, referral to outside agencies or items prescribed. CONCLUSION: Administration of a health needs questionnaire to patients registered with this general practice was not associated with an increase in consultation frequency or referral, or a change in prescribing patterns. No plausible explanation could be identified for the significant reduction in the number of home visits and prescriptions written for analgesics. It was concluded that these results were a statistical artefact. On the basis of the evidence from this study, GPs can be reassured that the administration of health needs questionnaires of the type used in this study will not result in any increase in workload or costs of care incurred by increased referrals to outside agencies or increased prescribing. (+info)
Where is the financial safety net for managed care physicians?
(8/354)
OBJECTIVE: Empiric research on mechanisms by which managed care physicians attempt to mitigate financial risk is lacking. We assumed the perspective of a managed care plan in investigating the relationship between risk sharing and the match between a physician's capitation payments and costs of care. DESIGN: The study design was a family of payment simulations using 2 years of managed care claims data. METHODS: Claims from a cohort of 82,525 managed care patients were used, with year 1 data determining a capitation rate for year 2 primary care services. The net provider payment in year 2 was examined under scenarios that might modify financial outcomes, including stop-loss insurance, age- and gender-adjustment of capitation, and risk pooling within independent practice associations. RESULTS: The size of a provider's patient panel was positively correlated with net per capita payment (r = 0.22; P < 0.0001 without risk modification strategies). The variance of the ratio of net to total revenue was utilized as a proxy for the degree of risk assumed in caring for a panel of capitated enrollees. Risk modification strategies reduced this variance measure, with risk pooling producing the largest effect, especially for providers of panels of fewer than 135 patients. In contrast, age- and gender-adjustment of capitation payments had little effect on reimbursement outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Short of increasing the pool of capitated patients, risk modification strategies appear limited in their ability to produce more equitable reimbursement to providers with small patient panels. With many providers assuming substantial risk in pursuing managed care contracts, these dynamics may favor organizational forms of medical practice that facilitate large patient panels within a single plan. (+info)