[Physicians' documentation behaviour and (non-)fulfillment of quality indicators in outpatient care of children and adolescents - A qualitative analysis].
IF 0.7 4区 医学Q4 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH
Teresa Müller, Claudia Mehl, Werner de Cruppé, Christian Bachmann, Max Geraedts
{"title":"[Physicians' documentation behaviour and (non-)fulfillment of quality indicators in outpatient care of children and adolescents - A qualitative analysis].","authors":"Teresa Müller, Claudia Mehl, Werner de Cruppé, Christian Bachmann, Max Geraedts","doi":"10.1055/a-2515-9417","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The research project \"Evaluation of quality of care in routine outpatient care for common childhood and adolescent diseases\" (QualiPäd) measures the quality of care for seven common somatic and psychiatric diseases in children and adolescents based on a set of consensual and evidence-based quality indicators developed specifically for this purpose. Analyses of patient files of pediatricians, general practitioners and child and adolescent psychiatrists showed that in some cases, due to lack of information in the patient records, fullfillment of some of the quality indicators could not be measured or the degree of fulfillment of the quality indicators was found to be low. Therefore, the aim of the present study was to identify system-, physician- and patient-related factors that influence documentation in patient records as well as (non)fulfillment of quality indicators.Three specialist-specific focus group interviews were conducted with physicians (8 pediatricians, 5 general practitioners, 2 child and adolescent psychiatrists) already involved in the study. Interview guides were developed to pick up the previous results of the study and to enable discussions on the interpretation of results as well as possible influencing factors at different levels. The interviews were transcribed and content-analyzed using MAXQDA software.The following factors were identified that appeared to influence treatment, documentation, and therefore (non)fulfillment of quality indicators: Patient characteristics (e. g., age, disease burden), demands of everyday practice (e. g., time pressure), treatment continuity (e. g., cared for by several providers), preference for experiential knowledge instead of quality indicators/guidelines, and an individual approach to documentation behavior (e.g, short reports as a personal thought support). In addition, participants criticized the approach to quality measurement via indicators and patient records.The physicians we interviewed decide individually how to proceed and what to document when treating common medical conditions in children and adolescents. In some cases, this is in clear contrast to the documentation requirements for calculating quality indicators, which means that quality measurement based on patient records is only possible to a limited extent.</p>","PeriodicalId":47653,"journal":{"name":"Gesundheitswesen","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Gesundheitswesen","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1055/a-2515-9417","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
The research project "Evaluation of quality of care in routine outpatient care for common childhood and adolescent diseases" (QualiPäd) measures the quality of care for seven common somatic and psychiatric diseases in children and adolescents based on a set of consensual and evidence-based quality indicators developed specifically for this purpose. Analyses of patient files of pediatricians, general practitioners and child and adolescent psychiatrists showed that in some cases, due to lack of information in the patient records, fullfillment of some of the quality indicators could not be measured or the degree of fulfillment of the quality indicators was found to be low. Therefore, the aim of the present study was to identify system-, physician- and patient-related factors that influence documentation in patient records as well as (non)fulfillment of quality indicators.Three specialist-specific focus group interviews were conducted with physicians (8 pediatricians, 5 general practitioners, 2 child and adolescent psychiatrists) already involved in the study. Interview guides were developed to pick up the previous results of the study and to enable discussions on the interpretation of results as well as possible influencing factors at different levels. The interviews were transcribed and content-analyzed using MAXQDA software.The following factors were identified that appeared to influence treatment, documentation, and therefore (non)fulfillment of quality indicators: Patient characteristics (e. g., age, disease burden), demands of everyday practice (e. g., time pressure), treatment continuity (e. g., cared for by several providers), preference for experiential knowledge instead of quality indicators/guidelines, and an individual approach to documentation behavior (e.g, short reports as a personal thought support). In addition, participants criticized the approach to quality measurement via indicators and patient records.The physicians we interviewed decide individually how to proceed and what to document when treating common medical conditions in children and adolescents. In some cases, this is in clear contrast to the documentation requirements for calculating quality indicators, which means that quality measurement based on patient records is only possible to a limited extent.
期刊介绍:
The health service informs you comprehensively and up-to-date about the most important topics of the health care system. In addition to guidelines, overviews and comments, you will find current research results and contributions to CME-certified continuing education and training. The journal offers a scientific discussion forum and a platform for communications from professional societies. The content quality is ensured by a publisher body, the expert advisory board and other experts in the peer review process.