{"title":"Evaluation of the end user (dentist) experience of undertaking clinical audit in a PCT-led NHS Modernisation Agency pilot scheme.","authors":"Phillip J Cannell","doi":"10.1308/135576109789389522","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>A new dental contract was introduced in the National Health Service (NHS) General Dental Services (GDS) in April 2006. Responsibility for clinical audit activities was devolved to Primary Care Trusts (PCTs) as part of their clinical governance remit. In July 2003, an NHS Modernisation Agency pilot scheme for clinical audit was launched by Southend PCT.</p><p><strong>Aim: </strong>The aim of this study was to evaluate this scheme.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A qualitative research method was used. It used audiotape recorded semi-structured research interviews with eight general dental practitioners (GDPs) who had taken part in the scheme. The evaluation focused on dentists' experiences of the scheme.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Dentists appreciated the central PCT-based coordinator for the scheme and found that the streamlining of design, analysis and report writing within the audit projects enabled efficient use of time. The design by an outside agency appeared to add credibility to the scheme. Participants felt that comparability of data derived from clinical audit was enhanced by the scheme and could lead to comparison across PCT patch, regional or even national levels. The use of feedback mechanisms within the scheme was appreciated and thought to help produce maximum value from a clinical audit project. There was evidence of beneficial change occurring within practices and for patients.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This study provided an evaluation of a particular clinical audit scheme, several aspects of which differed from the traditional GDS scheme. Organisations proposing to undertake clinical audit activities in conjunction with dentistry in the future may benefit from incorporating elements of this scheme into their project design.</p>","PeriodicalId":79454,"journal":{"name":"Primary dental care : journal of the Faculty of General Dental Practitioners (UK)","volume":"16 4","pages":"168-76"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2009-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1308/135576109789389522","citationCount":"6","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Primary dental care : journal of the Faculty of General Dental Practitioners (UK)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1308/135576109789389522","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 6
Abstract
Introduction: A new dental contract was introduced in the National Health Service (NHS) General Dental Services (GDS) in April 2006. Responsibility for clinical audit activities was devolved to Primary Care Trusts (PCTs) as part of their clinical governance remit. In July 2003, an NHS Modernisation Agency pilot scheme for clinical audit was launched by Southend PCT.
Aim: The aim of this study was to evaluate this scheme.
Methods: A qualitative research method was used. It used audiotape recorded semi-structured research interviews with eight general dental practitioners (GDPs) who had taken part in the scheme. The evaluation focused on dentists' experiences of the scheme.
Results: Dentists appreciated the central PCT-based coordinator for the scheme and found that the streamlining of design, analysis and report writing within the audit projects enabled efficient use of time. The design by an outside agency appeared to add credibility to the scheme. Participants felt that comparability of data derived from clinical audit was enhanced by the scheme and could lead to comparison across PCT patch, regional or even national levels. The use of feedback mechanisms within the scheme was appreciated and thought to help produce maximum value from a clinical audit project. There was evidence of beneficial change occurring within practices and for patients.
Conclusions: This study provided an evaluation of a particular clinical audit scheme, several aspects of which differed from the traditional GDS scheme. Organisations proposing to undertake clinical audit activities in conjunction with dentistry in the future may benefit from incorporating elements of this scheme into their project design.