What do we know about how to do audit and feedback? Pitfalls in applying evidence from a systematic review.

Hdl Handle:
What do we know about how to do audit and feedback? Pitfalls in applying evidence from a systematic review.
Foy, R; Eccles, M P; Jamtvedt, Gro; Young, J; Grimshaw, J M; Baker, R
BMC health services research 2005, 5:50
Additional Links:

Full metadata record

DC FieldValue Language
dc.contributor.authorFoy, R-
dc.contributor.authorEccles, M P-
dc.contributor.authorJamtvedt, Gro-
dc.contributor.authorYoung, J-
dc.contributor.authorGrimshaw, J M-
dc.contributor.authorBaker, R-
dc.identifier.citationBMC health services research 2005, 5:50en
dc.description.abstractBACKGROUND: Improving the quality of health care requires a range of evidence-based activities. Audit and feedback is commonly used as a quality improvement tool in the UK National Health Service [NHS]. We set out to assess whether current guidance and systematic review evidence can sufficiently inform practical decisions about how to use audit and feedback to improve quality of care. METHODS: We selected an important chronic disease encountered in primary care: diabetes mellitus. We identified recommendations from National Institute for Clinical Excellence (NICE) guidance on conducting audit and generated questions which would be relevant to any attempt to operationalise audit and feedback in a healthcare service setting. We explored the extent to which a systematic review of audit and feedback could provide practical guidance about whether audit and feedback should be used to improve quality of diabetes care and, if so, how audit and feedback could be optimised. RESULTS: National guidance suggests the importance of securing the right organisational conditions and processes. Review evidence suggests that audit and feedback can be effective in changing healthcare professional practice. However, the available evidence says relatively little about the detail of how to use audit and feedback most efficiently. CONCLUSION: Audit and feedback will continue to be an unreliable approach to quality improvement until we learn how and when it works best. Conceptualising audit and feedback within a theoretical framework offers a way forward.en
dc.publisherBioMed Centralen
dc.subjectVDP::Medisinske Fag: 700::Helsefag: 800::Helsetjeneste- og helseadministrasjonsforskning: 806en
dc.subjectVDP::Medisinske Fag: 700::Helsefag: 800::Samfunnsmedisin, sosialmedisin: 801en
dc.subject.meshDiabetes Mellitusen
dc.subject.meshEvidence-Based Medicineen
dc.subject.meshGreat Britainen
dc.subject.meshMedical Auditen
dc.subject.meshPatient Education as Topicen
dc.subject.meshPractice Guidelines as Topicen
dc.subject.meshPrimary Health Careen
dc.subject.meshQuality Assurance, Health Careen
dc.subject.meshState Medicineen
dc.titleWhat do we know about how to do audit and feedback? Pitfalls in applying evidence from a systematic review.en
dc.typeJournal articleen
dc.typepeer revieweden
dc.contributor.departmentCentre for Health Services Research, University of Newcastle upon Tyne, Newcastle upon Tyne, United Kingdom. r.c.foy@ncl.ac.uken
dc.identifier.journalBMC health services researchen
All Items in HeRA are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.