Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32046710›Full record

ArticleBMC health services research2020

The role of professional logics in quality register use: a realist evaluation.

Ann-Charlott Norman, Mattias Elg, Annika Nordin, Boel Andersson Gäre, Beatrix Algurén

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC health services research, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Ann-Charlott NormanJönköping Academy for Improvement of Health and Welfare, Jönköping University, Box 1026, SE-551 11, Jönköping, Sweden. ann-charlott.norman@regionuppsala.se.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3164-8462
Mattias ElgDepartment of Management and Engineering, HELIX Competence Centre, Linköping University, Linköping, Sweden.
Annika NordinJönköping Academy for Improvement of Health and Welfare, Jönköping University, Box 1026, SE-551 11, Jönköping, Sweden.
Boel Andersson GäreJönköping Academy for Improvement of Health and Welfare, Jönköping University, Box 1026, SE-551 11, Jönköping, Sweden.
Beatrix AlgurénJönköping Academy for Improvement of Health and Welfare, Jönköping University, Box 1026, SE-551 11, Jönköping, Sweden.

Funding

Sveriges Kommuner och Landsting 2012/743(261)
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundClinical practice improvements based on quality-register data are influenced by multiple factors. Although there is agreement that information from quality registers is valuable for quality improvement, practical ways of organising register use have been notoriously difficult to realise. The present study sought to investigate the mechanisms that lead various clinicians to use quality registers for improvement.

methodsThis research involves studying individuals' decisions in response to a Swedish programme focusing on increasing the use of quality registers. Through a case study, we focused on heart failure care and its corresponding register: the Swedish Heart Failure Register. The empirical data consisted of a purposive sample collected longitudinally by qualitative methods between 2013 and 2015. In total, 18 semi-structured interviews were carried out. We used realist evaluation to identify contexts, mechanisms, and outcomes.

resultsWe identified four contexts - registration, use of output data, governance, and improvement projects - that provide conditions for the initiation of specific mechanisms. Given a professional theoretical perspective, we further showed that mechanisms are based on the logics of either organisational improvement or clinical practice. The two logics offer insights into the ways in which clinicians choose to embrace or reject certain registers' initiatives.

conclusionsWe identified a strong path dependence, as registers have historically been tightly linked to the medical profession's competence. Few new initiatives in the studied programme reach the clinical context. We explain this through the lack of an organisational improvement logic and its corresponding mechanisms in the context of the medical profession. Implementation programmes must understand the logic of clinical practice; that is, be integrated with the ways in which work is carried out in everyday practice. Programmes need to be better at helping core health professionals to reach the highest standards of patient care.

Indexed as

LogicQuality ImprovementRegistriesHealth Services ResearchHumansSwedenClinical practiceProfessional logicsProgrammeQuality registersRealist evaluation

Identifiers

PMID32046710
PMCPMC7014753

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.