Improving the Healthcare of People with Learning Disabilities: Clinical Audit Project Examples. Kirsty MacLean Steel & Claire Palmer. Gaskell Publications Department, Royal College of Psychiatrists, London. 1999 45 pp., f12.50 (pbk). ISBN 19012242 40 4.

2000 ◽  
Vol 44 (6) ◽  
pp. 700-701
Author(s):  
David Brooks
2014 ◽  
Vol 38 (3) ◽  
pp. 128-131 ◽  
Author(s):  
Carol Paton ◽  
Thomas R. E. Barnes

SummaryAudit is an important tool for quality improvement. The collection of data on clinical performance against evidence-based and clinically relevant standards, which are considered by clinicians to be realistic in routine practice, can usefully prompt reflective practice and the implementation of change. Evidence of participation in clinical audit is required to achieve intended learning outcomes for trainees in psychiatry and revalidation for those who are members of the Royal College of Psychiatrists. This article addresses some of the practical steps involved in conducting an audit project, and, to illustrate key points, draws on lessons learnt from a national, audit-based, quality improvement programme of lithium prescribing and monitoring conducted through the Prescribing Observatory for Mental Health.


2009 ◽  
Vol os16 (4) ◽  
pp. 168-178 ◽  
Author(s):  
Phillip J Cannell

Introduction A new dental contract was introduced in the National Health Service (NHS) General Dental Services (GDS) in April 2006. Responsibility for clinical audit activities was devolved to Primary Care Trusts (PCTs) as part of their clinical governance remit. In July 2003, an NHS Modernisation Agency pilot scheme for clinical audit was launched by Southend PCT. Aim The aim of this study was to evaluate this scheme. Methods A qualitative research method was used. It used audiotape recorded semi-structured research interviews with eight general dental practitioners (GDPs) who had taken part in the scheme. The evaluation focused on dentists’ experiences of the scheme. Results Dentists appreciated the central PCT-based coordinator for the scheme and found that the streamlining of design, analysis and report writing within the audit projects enabled efficient use of time. The design by an outside agency appeared to add credibility to the scheme. Participants felt that comparability of data derived from clinical audit was enhanced by the scheme and could lead to comparison across PCT patch, regional or even national levels. The use of feedback mechanisms within the scheme was appreciated and thought to help produce maximum value from a clinical audit project. There was evidence of beneficial change occurring within practices and for patients. Conclusions This study provided an evaluation of a particular clinical audit scheme, several aspects of which differed from the traditional GDS scheme. Organisations proposing to undertake clinical audit activities in conjunction with dentistry in the future may benefit from incorporating elements of this scheme into their project design.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document