Clinical Governance in Musculoskeletal Care—An Online Cross-Sectional Survey of What Allied Health Professionals Participate in, and What They Value

IF 2.1 4区医学 Q3 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES

Journal of evaluation in clinical practice Pub Date : 2025-04-13 DOI:10.1111/jep.70096

James Midgley, Jonathan Thompson, Chris Boyes

{"title":"Clinical Governance in Musculoskeletal Care—An Online Cross-Sectional Survey of What Allied Health Professionals Participate in, and What They Value","authors":"James Midgley, Jonathan Thompson, Chris Boyes","doi":"10.1111/jep.70096","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Rationale</h3>\n \n <p>Clinical governance (CG) is a systematic approach to improving care quality, ensuring healthcare organisations and professionals are accountable for safe, effective, and continuously advancing practice. Traditionally, CG frameworks follow the ‘seven pillars’ model: risk management, education and training, patient and carer experience, information management, clinical effectiveness, clinical audit, and staff management. However, optimal CG may also require additional elements. Despite its importance, research on CG, and clinicians' views, remains limited, particularly in musculoskeletal (MSK) care where calls for reform are growing.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Aim</h3>\n \n <p>To explore the views of NHS MSK Allied Health Professionals (AHPs) on CG, establishing what activities are undertaken and valued. An additional objective was to identify any differences between clinical leads and non-leads.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>This exploratory study used an anonymous online cross-sectional survey built with Qualtrics software. Questions were informed by evidence and MSK think-tank discussions, enhancing content validity. The survey evaluated general opinions as well as perspectives on the seven pillars and 23 additional CG activities, including teamwork, culture, and leadership. It was disseminated via social media (X) and Interactive CSP (iCSP) to maximise the response rate. Predominantly ordinal data were analysed using descriptive statistics, with qualitative comments examined using content analysis.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>Data from 52 participants were analysed. 96.15% were physiotherapists, 90.38% worked in the NHS, and 53.85% held clinical leadership roles. Respondents viewed CG positively, with 73.08% strongly agreeing it was essential for care quality. Most participated in and valued both the seven pillars and additional activities. No substantial variance was observed between clinical leads and non-leads.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusion</h3>\n \n <p>MSK AHPs in this study strongly supported CG and valued a broader range of activities than the seven pillars model asserts. Findings suggest current approaches may not fully reflect the scope of CG as perceived by clinicians, highlighting the need for more inclusive CG frameworks.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":15997,"journal":{"name":"Journal of evaluation in clinical practice","volume":"31 3","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of evaluation in clinical practice","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jep.70096","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Rationale

Clinical governance (CG) is a systematic approach to improving care quality, ensuring healthcare organisations and professionals are accountable for safe, effective, and continuously advancing practice. Traditionally, CG frameworks follow the ‘seven pillars’ model: risk management, education and training, patient and carer experience, information management, clinical effectiveness, clinical audit, and staff management. However, optimal CG may also require additional elements. Despite its importance, research on CG, and clinicians' views, remains limited, particularly in musculoskeletal (MSK) care where calls for reform are growing.

Aim

To explore the views of NHS MSK Allied Health Professionals (AHPs) on CG, establishing what activities are undertaken and valued. An additional objective was to identify any differences between clinical leads and non-leads.

Methods

This exploratory study used an anonymous online cross-sectional survey built with Qualtrics software. Questions were informed by evidence and MSK think-tank discussions, enhancing content validity. The survey evaluated general opinions as well as perspectives on the seven pillars and 23 additional CG activities, including teamwork, culture, and leadership. It was disseminated via social media (X) and Interactive CSP (iCSP) to maximise the response rate. Predominantly ordinal data were analysed using descriptive statistics, with qualitative comments examined using content analysis.

Results

Data from 52 participants were analysed. 96.15% were physiotherapists, 90.38% worked in the NHS, and 53.85% held clinical leadership roles. Respondents viewed CG positively, with 73.08% strongly agreeing it was essential for care quality. Most participated in and valued both the seven pillars and additional activities. No substantial variance was observed between clinical leads and non-leads.

Conclusion

MSK AHPs in this study strongly supported CG and valued a broader range of activities than the seven pillars model asserts. Findings suggest current approaches may not fully reflect the scope of CG as perceived by clinicians, highlighting the need for more inclusive CG frameworks.

查看原文本刊更多论文

肌肉骨骼护理的临床治理——一项关于专职健康专业人员参与和他们所重视的内容的在线横断面调查

临床治理（CG）是一种提高护理质量的系统方法，确保医疗机构和专业人员对安全、有效和持续推进的实践负责。传统上，CG框架遵循“七大支柱”模式：风险管理、教育和培训、患者和护理人员经验、信息管理、临床有效性、临床审计和员工管理。然而，最佳CG可能还需要其他元素。尽管CG很重要，但对它的研究和临床医生的观点仍然有限，特别是在肌肉骨骼（MSK）护理方面，要求改革的呼声越来越高。目的探讨NHS MSK联合健康专业人员（AHPs）对CG的看法，确定采取和重视哪些活动。另一个目的是确定临床导联和非导联之间的任何差异。方法采用Qualtrics软件进行匿名在线横断面调查。问题由证据和MSK智库讨论提供信息，提高了内容的有效性。该调查评估了对7个支柱和另外23个CG活动（包括团队合作、文化和领导力）的总体意见和观点。它通过社交媒体(X)和交互式CSP （iCSP）传播，以最大限度地提高回复率。使用描述性统计分析主要顺序数据，使用内容分析检查定性评论。结果分析了52名参与者的数据。96.15%为物理治疗师，90.38%在NHS工作，53.85%担任临床领导职务。受访者对CG持积极态度，73.08%的受访者强烈同意CG对护理质量至关重要。大多数人都参与并重视这七个支柱和其他活动。在临床导联和非导联之间没有观察到实质性的差异。结论本研究中的MSK ahp强烈支持CG，并且比七支柱模型所断言的更广泛地评价了活动。研究结果表明，目前的方法可能不能完全反映临床医生所认为的CG的范围，强调需要更具包容性的CG框架。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Journal of evaluation in clinical practice 医学-卫生保健

CiteScore

4.80

自引率

4.20%

发文量

143

审稿时长

3-8 weeks

期刊介绍： The Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice aims to promote the evaluation and development of clinical practice across medicine, nursing and the allied health professions. All aspects of health services research and public health policy analysis and debate are of interest to the Journal whether studied from a population-based or individual patient-centred perspective. Of particular interest to the Journal are submissions on all aspects of clinical effectiveness and efficiency including evidence-based medicine, clinical practice guidelines, clinical decision making, clinical services organisation, implementation and delivery, health economic evaluation, health process and outcome measurement and new or improved methods (conceptual and statistical) for systematic inquiry into clinical practice. Papers may take a classical quantitative or qualitative approach to investigation (or may utilise both techniques) or may take the form of learned essays, structured/systematic reviews and critiques.