Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37813473›Full record

ArticleBJGP open2024

Assessing care quality in general practice: a qualitative study of GPs in Ireland.

Aaron Chan, Louise Hickey, Kieran Finucane, John Brennan

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BJGP open, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

4 authors.

Aaron ChanUniversity College Dublin School of Medicine, Dublin, Republic of Ireland aaron.chan@ucdconnect.ie.
Louise Hickey
Kieran FinucaneStillorgan Medical Centre, Dublin, Republic of Ireland.
John BrennanQuality Improvement Faculty, Royal College of Physicians of Ireland, Dublin, Republic of Ireland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIt is estimated that each year in Ireland, approximately 29 million consultations occur in general practice with a patient satisfaction level of 90%. To date, research has been lacking on how GPs assess the quality of care.

aimTo examine how GPs assess care quality during routine practice with respect to the following pillars of quality improvement: effectiveness, safety, timeliness, equity, efficiency, sustainability, and person-centredness. DESIGN &

settingQualitative study of GPs in Ireland.

methodIn this qualitative study, semi-structured interviews were conducted with 10 GPs who were recruited via a snowball sampling strategy. Interviews were recorded, transcribed, and analysed. Quality 'assessment points' were identified and themes were synthesised to produce a theoretical framework.

resultsFive female and five male GPs practising in a variety of settings were interviewed. The age range was 33-68 years. In total, 122 assessment points emerged from the data and were collated into the following eight themes: the GP as a professional person factors; the patient and coproduction factors; care team factors; direct care factors; outcome factors; practice environment and organisation factors; external environment factors; and improvement approach factors.

conclusionThis is the first study to examine how GPs in Ireland assess care quality as a holistic construct during daily care. The qualitative approach applied yielded rich and diverse insights into the many assessment points that GPs use to inform their approach and actions as clinicians, managers, collaborators, and leaders to maximise patient care. The theory produced is likely useful and applicable for practising GPs, healthcare administration, policymakers, and funders in planning and executing changes for quality improvement.

Indexed as

assessmentgeneral practiceprimary healthcarequality improvement

Identifiers

PMID37813473
PMCPMC11169978

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.