自我评估和调查员评估对国家全科医生认证计划实地考察表现的影响。

David T McNaughton, Paul Mara, Michael P Jones
{"title":"自我评估和调查员评估对国家全科医生认证计划实地考察表现的影响。","authors":"David T McNaughton, Paul Mara, Michael P Jones","doi":"10.1071/AH23235","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Objective There is a need to undertake more proactive and in-depth analyses of general practice accreditation processes. Two areas that have been highlighted as areas of potential inconsistency are the self-assessment and surveyor assessment of indicators. Methods The data encompass 757 accreditation visits made between December 2020 and July 2022. A mixed-effect multilevel logistic regression model determined the association between attempt of the self-assessment and indicator conformity from the surveyor assessment. Furthermore, we present a contrast of the rate of indicator conformity between surveyors as an approximation of the inter-assessor consistency from the site visit. Results Two hundred and seventy-seven (37%) practices did not attempt or accurately report conformity to any indicators at the self-assessment. Association between attempting the self-assessment and the rate of indicator non-conformity at the site visit failed to reach statistical significance (OR = 0.90 [95% CI = 1.14-0.72], P  = 0.28). A small number of surveyors (N  = 9/34) demonstrated statistically significant differences in the rate of indicator conformity compared to the mean of all surveyors. Conclusions Attempt of the self-assessment did not predict indicator conformity at the site visit overall. Appropriate levels of consistency of indicator assessment between surveyors at the site visit were identified.</p>","PeriodicalId":93891,"journal":{"name":"Australian health review : a publication of the Australian Hospital Association","volume":" ","pages":"222-227"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The impact of self-assessment and surveyor assessment on site visit performance under the National General Practice Accreditation scheme.\",\"authors\":\"David T McNaughton, Paul Mara, Michael P Jones\",\"doi\":\"10.1071/AH23235\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Objective There is a need to undertake more proactive and in-depth analyses of general practice accreditation processes. Two areas that have been highlighted as areas of potential inconsistency are the self-assessment and surveyor assessment of indicators. Methods The data encompass 757 accreditation visits made between December 2020 and July 2022. A mixed-effect multilevel logistic regression model determined the association between attempt of the self-assessment and indicator conformity from the surveyor assessment. Furthermore, we present a contrast of the rate of indicator conformity between surveyors as an approximation of the inter-assessor consistency from the site visit. Results Two hundred and seventy-seven (37%) practices did not attempt or accurately report conformity to any indicators at the self-assessment. Association between attempting the self-assessment and the rate of indicator non-conformity at the site visit failed to reach statistical significance (OR = 0.90 [95% CI = 1.14-0.72], P  = 0.28). A small number of surveyors (N  = 9/34) demonstrated statistically significant differences in the rate of indicator conformity compared to the mean of all surveyors. Conclusions Attempt of the self-assessment did not predict indicator conformity at the site visit overall. Appropriate levels of consistency of indicator assessment between surveyors at the site visit were identified.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":93891,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Australian health review : a publication of the Australian Hospital Association\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"222-227\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-06-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Australian health review : a publication of the Australian Hospital Association\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1071/AH23235\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Australian health review : a publication of the Australian Hospital Association","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1071/AH23235","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目标需要对全科医生评审过程进行更积极、更深入的分析。方法数据包括 2020 年 12 月至 2022 年 7 月期间进行的 757 次评审访问。混合效应多层次逻辑回归模型确定了自我评估尝试与调查员评估指标符合性之间的关联。此外,我们还提供了调查员之间指标符合率的对比,作为实地考察中评估员之间一致性的近似值。结果277家(37%)医疗机构在自我评估时未尝试或准确报告任何指标的符合性。尝试自我评估与实地考察时指标不符合率之间的关系未达到统计学意义(OR = 0.90 [95% CI = 1.14-0.72],P = 0.28)。与所有调查员的平均值相比,少数调查员(N = 9/34)的指标符合率存在显著的统计学差异。在实地考察中,调查员之间的指标评估一致性达到了适当的水平。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The impact of self-assessment and surveyor assessment on site visit performance under the National General Practice Accreditation scheme.

Objective There is a need to undertake more proactive and in-depth analyses of general practice accreditation processes. Two areas that have been highlighted as areas of potential inconsistency are the self-assessment and surveyor assessment of indicators. Methods The data encompass 757 accreditation visits made between December 2020 and July 2022. A mixed-effect multilevel logistic regression model determined the association between attempt of the self-assessment and indicator conformity from the surveyor assessment. Furthermore, we present a contrast of the rate of indicator conformity between surveyors as an approximation of the inter-assessor consistency from the site visit. Results Two hundred and seventy-seven (37%) practices did not attempt or accurately report conformity to any indicators at the self-assessment. Association between attempting the self-assessment and the rate of indicator non-conformity at the site visit failed to reach statistical significance (OR = 0.90 [95% CI = 1.14-0.72], P  = 0.28). A small number of surveyors (N  = 9/34) demonstrated statistically significant differences in the rate of indicator conformity compared to the mean of all surveyors. Conclusions Attempt of the self-assessment did not predict indicator conformity at the site visit overall. Appropriate levels of consistency of indicator assessment between surveyors at the site visit were identified.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信