强制性质量改进框架组件的可接受性:瑞士全科医生的调查。

IF 2.5 Q2 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
Health Services Insights Pub Date : 2025-06-21 eCollection Date: 2025-01-01 DOI:10.1177/11786329251346828
David Wirth, Oliver Senn, Jakob M Burgstaller, Sima Djalali, Leander Muheim, Adrian Rohrbasser, Joel Lehmann, Stefan Markun
{"title":"强制性质量改进框架组件的可接受性:瑞士全科医生的调查。","authors":"David Wirth, Oliver Senn, Jakob M Burgstaller, Sima Djalali, Leander Muheim, Adrian Rohrbasser, Joel Lehmann, Stefan Markun","doi":"10.1177/11786329251346828","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>In Switzerland, recently introduced legislation requires the implementation of a framework for mandatory quality improvement at the level of individual general practitioners (GPs) and includes the introduction of quality indicators (QIs) amongst other components. The GP-sided acceptance of potential components of such a framework is important to its success.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To identify components of a potential framework for mandatory quality improvement that are most likely to be accepted by Swiss GPs.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>Cross-sectional web-based survey conducted among employed and self-employed Swiss GPs in 2024.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The survey was distributed to 1103 Swiss GPs via their physician networks. The survey inquired the acceptability of 62 possible components of a mandatory framework for quality improvement. Components were categorized as \"acceptable\" if they were rated as \"acceptable\" or \"very acceptable\" by more than 50% of participants, in contrast to those rated as \"neutral\" or \"not acceptable.\"</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 244 GPs participated (participation rate 22.1%, 53.0% male, 51.2% <50 years old, 50.8% employed). The majority of participants rated 31 of the proposed 62 components as acceptable. Among these were QIs pertaining to structures and processes of care (rated as acceptable by 58.3%-83.4%) and sharing QI achievement data with peers from different group practices and physician networks (53.9%-92.2%). A majority of participants accepted physician networks, medical associations, and academic institutions as entities that could establish QIs and manage QI data (acceptance 62.1%-88.8%).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Swiss GPs appear to accept QIs that reflect structures and processes of care established by physician networks, medical associations or academic institutions, exclusively shared among their peers.</p>","PeriodicalId":12876,"journal":{"name":"Health Services Insights","volume":"18 ","pages":"11786329251346828"},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12182608/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Acceptability of Components for a Mandatory Quality Improvement Framework: A Survey Among Swiss General Practitioners.\",\"authors\":\"David Wirth, Oliver Senn, Jakob M Burgstaller, Sima Djalali, Leander Muheim, Adrian Rohrbasser, Joel Lehmann, Stefan Markun\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/11786329251346828\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>In Switzerland, recently introduced legislation requires the implementation of a framework for mandatory quality improvement at the level of individual general practitioners (GPs) and includes the introduction of quality indicators (QIs) amongst other components. The GP-sided acceptance of potential components of such a framework is important to its success.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To identify components of a potential framework for mandatory quality improvement that are most likely to be accepted by Swiss GPs.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>Cross-sectional web-based survey conducted among employed and self-employed Swiss GPs in 2024.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The survey was distributed to 1103 Swiss GPs via their physician networks. The survey inquired the acceptability of 62 possible components of a mandatory framework for quality improvement. Components were categorized as \\\"acceptable\\\" if they were rated as \\\"acceptable\\\" or \\\"very acceptable\\\" by more than 50% of participants, in contrast to those rated as \\\"neutral\\\" or \\\"not acceptable.\\\"</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 244 GPs participated (participation rate 22.1%, 53.0% male, 51.2% <50 years old, 50.8% employed). The majority of participants rated 31 of the proposed 62 components as acceptable. Among these were QIs pertaining to structures and processes of care (rated as acceptable by 58.3%-83.4%) and sharing QI achievement data with peers from different group practices and physician networks (53.9%-92.2%). A majority of participants accepted physician networks, medical associations, and academic institutions as entities that could establish QIs and manage QI data (acceptance 62.1%-88.8%).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Swiss GPs appear to accept QIs that reflect structures and processes of care established by physician networks, medical associations or academic institutions, exclusively shared among their peers.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":12876,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Health Services Insights\",\"volume\":\"18 \",\"pages\":\"11786329251346828\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-06-21\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12182608/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Health Services Insights\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/11786329251346828\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health Services Insights","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/11786329251346828","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:在瑞士,最近引入的立法要求在个体全科医生(gp)层面实施强制性质量改进框架,并包括在其他组成部分中引入质量指标(QIs)。国内生产总值方面接受这种框架的潜在组成部分,对其成功至关重要。目的:确定瑞士全科医生最有可能接受的强制性质量改进的潜在框架的组成部分。设计:在2024年对受雇和自雇瑞士全科医生进行的横断面网络调查。方法:通过瑞士全科医生网络对1103名全科医生进行调查。这项调查询问了强制性改进质量框架的62个可能组成部分的可接受性。如果被超过50%的参与者评为“可接受”或“非常可接受”,则组件被归类为“可接受”,而被评为“中性”或“不可接受”的组件则被归类为“可接受”。结果:共有244名全科医生参与(参与率22.1%,男性53.0%,51.2%)。结论:瑞士全科医生似乎接受反映医生网络、医学协会或学术机构建立的护理结构和过程的QIs,这些QIs仅在同行中共享。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Acceptability of Components for a Mandatory Quality Improvement Framework: A Survey Among Swiss General Practitioners.

Acceptability of Components for a Mandatory Quality Improvement Framework: A Survey Among Swiss General Practitioners.

Acceptability of Components for a Mandatory Quality Improvement Framework: A Survey Among Swiss General Practitioners.

Acceptability of Components for a Mandatory Quality Improvement Framework: A Survey Among Swiss General Practitioners.

Background: In Switzerland, recently introduced legislation requires the implementation of a framework for mandatory quality improvement at the level of individual general practitioners (GPs) and includes the introduction of quality indicators (QIs) amongst other components. The GP-sided acceptance of potential components of such a framework is important to its success.

Objectives: To identify components of a potential framework for mandatory quality improvement that are most likely to be accepted by Swiss GPs.

Design: Cross-sectional web-based survey conducted among employed and self-employed Swiss GPs in 2024.

Methods: The survey was distributed to 1103 Swiss GPs via their physician networks. The survey inquired the acceptability of 62 possible components of a mandatory framework for quality improvement. Components were categorized as "acceptable" if they were rated as "acceptable" or "very acceptable" by more than 50% of participants, in contrast to those rated as "neutral" or "not acceptable."

Results: A total of 244 GPs participated (participation rate 22.1%, 53.0% male, 51.2% <50 years old, 50.8% employed). The majority of participants rated 31 of the proposed 62 components as acceptable. Among these were QIs pertaining to structures and processes of care (rated as acceptable by 58.3%-83.4%) and sharing QI achievement data with peers from different group practices and physician networks (53.9%-92.2%). A majority of participants accepted physician networks, medical associations, and academic institutions as entities that could establish QIs and manage QI data (acceptance 62.1%-88.8%).

Conclusions: Swiss GPs appear to accept QIs that reflect structures and processes of care established by physician networks, medical associations or academic institutions, exclusively shared among their peers.

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
Health Services Insights
Health Services Insights HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES-
CiteScore
3.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
47
审稿时长
8 weeks
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信