A Delphi study assessing the utility of quality improvement tools and resources in Australian primary care

Upham, Susan, Janamian, Tina, Crossland, Lisa and Jackson, Claire (2016) A Delphi study assessing the utility of quality improvement tools and resources in Australian primary care. The Medical Journal of Australia, 204 7 Suppl: S29-S37. doi:10.5694/mja16.00115


Author Upham, Susan
Janamian, Tina
Crossland, Lisa
Jackson, Claire
Title A Delphi study assessing the utility of quality improvement tools and resources in Australian primary care
Journal name The Medical Journal of Australia   Check publisher's open access policy
ISSN 0025-729X
1326-5377
Publication date 2016-04-18
Year available 2016
Sub-type Article (original research)
DOI 10.5694/mja16.00115
Open Access Status DOI
Volume 204
Issue 7 Suppl
Start page S29
End page S37
Total pages 19
Place of publication Strawberry Hills, NSW Australia
Publisher Australasian Medical Publishing Company
Collection year 2017
Language eng
Formatted abstract
Objectives: To determine the relevance and utility of online tools and resources to support organisational performance development in primary care and to complement the Primary Care Practice Improvement Tool (PC-PIT).

Design: A purposively recruited Expert Advisory Panel of 12 end users used a modified Delphi technique to evaluate 53 tools and resources identified through a previously conducted systematic review. The panel comprised six practice managers and six general practitioners who had participated in the PC-PIT pilot study in 2013–2014. Tools and resources were reviewed in three rounds using a standard pre-tested assessment form. Recommendations, scores and reasons for recommending or rejecting each tool or resource were analysed to determine the final suite of tools and resources. The evaluation was conducted from November 2014 to August 2015.

Results: Recommended tools and resources scored highly (mean score, 16/20) in Rounds 1 and 2 of review (n = 25). These tools and resources were perceived to be easily used, useful to the practice and supportive of the PC-PIT. Rejected resources scored considerably lower (mean score, 5/20) and were noted to have limitations such as having no value to the practice and poor utility (n = 6). A final review (Round 3) of 28 resources resulted in a suite of 21 to support the elements of the PC-PIT.

Conclusions: This suite of tools and resources offers one approach to supporting the quality improvement initiatives currently in development in primary care reform.
Q-Index Code C1
Q-Index Status Provisional Code
Institutional Status UQ

Document type: Journal Article
Sub-type: Article (original research)
Collections: Discipline of General Practice Publications
HERDC Pre-Audit
Admin Only - School of Medicine
School of Medicine Publications
 
Versions
Version Filter Type
Citation counts: TR Web of Science Citation Count  Cited 2 times in Thomson Reuters Web of Science Article | Citations
Scopus Citation Count Cited 2 times in Scopus Article | Citations
Google Scholar Search Google Scholar
Created: Mon, 18 Apr 2016, 21:46:01 EST by Tina Janamian on behalf of Discipline of General Practice