ArticleBMC health services research2015
Understanding staff perspectives of quality in practice in healthcare.
Article in BMC health services research, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
23 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- A model explaining refugee experiences of the Australian healthcare system: a systematic review of refugee perceptions.BMC international health and human rights · 2019Pooled it
- Assessing a behavioral nudge on healthcare leaders' intentions to implement evidence-based practices.PloS one · 2024Trial
- Performance-Based Reimbursement, Illegitimate Tasks, Moral Distress, and Quality Care in Primary Care: A Mediation Model of Longitudinal Data.Annals of family medicine · 2025Article
- Healthcare Professionals' Responses to Complaints: A Qualitative Interview Study With Patients, Carers and Healthcare Professionals Using the Theoretical Domains Framework and COM-B Model.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2024Article
- Implementation of the WHO Standards to assess the quality of paediatric care using health workers as source of data: findings of a multicentre study (CHOICE) in Italy.BMJ paediatrics open · 2024Article
- Nursing Leadership in a Post-Pandemic Elective Orthopaedic Theatre Department: A Detailed Thematic Analysis of an Open-Ended Qualitative Survey.Nursing reports (Pavia, Italy) · 2024Article
- Article
- Exploring quality improvement for diabetes care in First Nations communities in Canada: a multiple case study.BMC health services research · 2023Article
- Quality in Psychiatric Care in the Community Mental Health Setting from the Perspective of Patients and Staff.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2023Article
- Article
- The perception of health care quality by primary health care managers in Ukraine.BMC health services research · 2022Article
- The Quality in Psychiatric Care-Inpatient Staff Instrument: A Psychometric Evaluation.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Adaptation, psychometric properties and factor structure of the Spanish Quality in Psychiatric Care-Outpatient Staff (QPC-OPS) instrument.Scientific reports · 2022Article
- "What it really takes" - A qualitative study of how professionals coproduce healthcare service with immigrant patients.Journal of migration and health · 2022Article
- Article
- Talking about quality: how 'quality' is conceptualized in nursing homes and homecare.BMC health services research · 2021Article
- Early intervention and perceived quality: Refinement of the inventory of quality in early intervention centers.Medicine · 2019Article
- Promoting healthy eating in primary health care from the perspective of health professionals: a qualitative comparative study in the context of South America.BMC nutrition · 2018Article
- Healthcare Quality: A Concept Analysis.Nursing forum · 2017Article
- Referring to multimodal rehabilitation for patients with musculoskeletal disorders - a register study in primary health care.BMC health services research · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundExtensive work has been focussed on developing and analysing different performance and quality measures in health services. However less has been published on how practitioners understand and assess performance and the quality of care in routine practice. This paper explores how health service staff understand and assess their own performance and quality of their day to day work. Asking staff how they knew they were doing a good job, it explored the values, motivations and behaviours of staff in relation to healthcare performance. The paper illustrates how staff perceptions of quality and performance are often based on different logics to the dominant notions of performance and quality embedded in current policy.
methodsUsing grounded theory and qualitative, in-depth interviews this research studied how primary care staff understood and assessed their own performance and quality in everyday practice. 21 people were interviewed, comprising of health visitors, occupational therapists, managers, human resources staff and administrators. Analytic themes were developed using open and axial coding.
resultsDiverse aspects of quality and performance in healthcare are rooted in differing organisational logics. Staff values and personal and professional standards are an essential element in understanding how quality is co-produced in everyday service interactions. Tensions can exist between patient centred, relational care and the pressures of efficiency and rationalisation.
conclusionsUnderstanding the perspectives of staff in relation to how quality in practice develops helps us to reflect on different mechanisms to manage quality. Quality in everyday practice relies upon staff values, motivations and behaviours and how staff interact with patients, putting both explicit and tacit knowledge into specific action. However organisational systems that manage quality often operate on the basis of rational measurement. These do not always incorporate the intangible, relational and tacit dimensions of care. Management models need to account for these relational and experiential aspects of care quality to support the prioritisation of patients' needs. Services management, knowledge management and ethics of care literature can provide stronger theoretical building blocks to understand how to manage quality in practice.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.