Improving Diabetes Care Through a Multicomponent Quality Improvement Model in a Practice-Based Research Network

2007 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
pp. 34-41 ◽  
Author(s):  
Steven Ornstein ◽  
Paul J. Nietert ◽  
Ruth G. Jenkins ◽  
Andrea M. Wessell ◽  
Lynne S. Nemeth ◽  
...  
2020 ◽  
Vol 52 (9) ◽  
pp. 642-646
Author(s):  
Clarissa Hoff ◽  
Luisito Caleon ◽  
Grace Lee ◽  
Mathew Quan

Background and Objectives: A 2019 study found that between 2014 and 2017, family medicine residents had little improvement in self-assessed preparedness to lead quality improvement projects. This study explored the effectiveness of leveraging a practice-based research network (PBRN) across multiple family medicine residencies not only for implementing quality improvement projects, but also as a teaching tool designed to improve knowledge, attitudes, beliefs, and leadership skills in family medicine faculty and residents. Methods: Residents in family medicine residency programs and one community internal medicine program and family medicine teaching faculty participated in a PBRN-led quality improvement project (QIP) to improve colon cancer screening in their clinic. Of 101 participants, 79 (78%) were residents and 22 (22%) were faculty or attending physicians. Questions surveying participants’ knowledge and confidence related to QIP before and after the QIP were given. Results: Overall, participants reported an improvement in their basic understanding of QI concepts (P=.004). They also reported having sufficient staff and ancillary support to meaningfully participate (P=.033). Participants indicated they had more confidence in their ability to participate in a QI project (P=.002), initiate, design, and lead such a project (P=.001), and teach their peers and staff basic QI concepts (P<.001). Conclusions: PBRNs appear to be a unique way to subjectively improve residents’ confidence in their quality improvement skills. PBRNs should be further explored as a method for educating family medicine residents in quality improvement.


Author(s):  
Lori M Dickerson ◽  
Adrienne Z Ables ◽  
Charles J Everett ◽  
Arch G Mainous ◽  
Allison M McCutcheon ◽  
...  

2012 ◽  
Vol 5 (4) ◽  
pp. 351-355 ◽  
Author(s):  
Laura-Mae Baldwin ◽  
Gina A. Keppel ◽  
Ardis Davis ◽  
Janelle Guirguis-Blake ◽  
Rex W. Force ◽  
...  

2018 ◽  
Vol 2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Treah Haggerty MD, MS ◽  
◽  
Jun Xiang MS ◽  
Christine Plaugher MS ◽  
Stacey Whanger, MPH ◽  
...  

Antibiotics ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (3) ◽  
pp. 303
Author(s):  
Kevimy Agossa ◽  
Kadiatou Sy ◽  
Théo Mainville ◽  
Marjolaine Gosset ◽  
Sylvie Jeanne ◽  
...  

The aim of the present survey is to investigate the use of antibiotics during periodontal therapy among French dentists with a focus on exploring potential differences between various groups of practitioners. A self-administered questionnaire was distributed to different groups of practitioners including members of (i) the French Society of Periodontology and Implantology; (ii) the College of University Teachers in Periodontology and, (iii) private practitioners participating in the French general dental practice-based research network. 272 questionnaires were included in the analysis. Prescription patterns were globally in line with the current recommendations. Systemic antibiotics are most frequently used as a first-line therapy in necrotizing periodontitis (92%) and aggressive periodontitis (53.3% to 66.1%). However, malpractice still exists, including in the management of periodontal abscesses. Antibiotics are prescribed (i) less frequently for periodontal abscesses and (ii) more frequently for generalized aggressive periodontitis by members of the periodontal society and University college (p < 0.05). Amoxicillin (59.9%) and the amoxicillin + metronidazole (59.6%) combination were the most frequently prescribed molecules. Providing a high number of periodontal treatments per week, being more recently graduated, having a post-graduate certificate in periodontology and holding or having held an academic position/hospital practice were all factors associated with a better knowledge of and/or more adequate antibiotic use.


BMJ Open ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 8 (2) ◽  
pp. e018826 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jacquie Boyang Lu ◽  
Kristin J Danko ◽  
Michael D Elfassy ◽  
Vivian Welch ◽  
Jeremy M Grimshaw ◽  
...  

BackgroundSocially disadvantaged populations carry a disproportionate burden of diabetes-related morbidity and mortality. There is an emerging interest in quality improvement (QI) strategies in the care of patients with diabetes, however, the effect of these interventions on disadvantaged groups remains unclear.ObjectiveThis is a secondary analysis of a systematic review that seeks to examine the extent of equity considerations in diabetes QI studies, specifically quantifying the proportion of studies that target interventions toward disadvantaged populations and conduct analyses on the impact of interventions on disadvantaged groups.Research design and methodsStudies were identified using Medline, HealthStar and the Cochrane Effective Practice and Organisation of Care database. Randomised controlled trials assessing 12 QI strategies targeting health systems, healthcare professionals and/or patients for the management of adult outpatients with diabetes were eligible. The place of residence, race/ethnicity/culture/language, occupational status, gender/sexual identity, religious affiliations, education level, socioeconomic status, social capital, plus age, disability, sexual preferences and relationships (PROGRESS-Plus) framework was used to identify trials that focused on disadvantaged patient populations, to examine the types of equity-relevant factors that are being considered and to explore temporal trends in equity-relevant diabetes QI trials.ResultsOf the 278 trials that met the inclusion criteria, 95 trials had equity-relevant considerations. These include 64 targeted trials that focused on a disadvantaged population with the aim to improve the health status of that population and 31 general trials that undertook subgroup analyses to assess the extent to which their interventions may have had differential impacts on disadvantaged subgroups. Trials predominantly focused on race/ethnicity, socioeconomic status and place of residence as potential factors for disadvantage in patients receiving diabetes care.ConclusionsLess than one-third of diabetes QI trials included equity-relevant considerations, limiting the relevance and applicability of their data to disadvantaged populations. There is a need for better data collection, reporting, analysis and interventions on the social determinants of health that may influence the health outcomes of patients with diabetes.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42013005165.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document