参与临床委托:东兰开夏郡全科医生的态度。

Quality in primary care Pub Date : 2014-01-01
Ian Ashman, Steve Willcocks
{"title":"参与临床委托:东兰开夏郡全科医生的态度。","authors":"Ian Ashman,&nbsp;Steve Willcocks","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Clinical commissioning is the centrepiece of government health reforms. Engagement with the reforms is important if they are to bring about improvements in the quality of healthcare. This is important in any healthcare system, not just the UK National Health Service (NHS). This study draws on data from a specially commissioned survey, exploring the extent to which general practitioners (GPs) in East Lancashire are engaged with clinical commissioning. Aim The aim of this study was to assess levels of engagement with clinical commissioning using a Clinical Commissioning Engagement Scale (CCES).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A six-point Likert scale CCES was distributed to all GPs within the boundary of East Lancashire Clinical Commissioning Group (CCG). The GPs are distributed across five localities that vary in terms of geography, demography and previous commissioning experience. The CCES aimed to capture comparative levels of engagement across twelve items, three for each of four dimensions of engagement: (1) personal attitude, (2) perceived capacity, (3) perceived capability and (4) opportunity. Eighty-five returns were received, representing a response rate of 35.3%. A full analysis of the data was conducted using SPSS v. 19.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The results demonstrate concern for capacity and capability across the localities, where mean scores are universally well below the midpoint of the scale. However, attitude and opportunity were relatively positive indicators with mean scores above midpoint for all localities.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The findings highlight the potential challenges for CCGs in engaging GPs and in particular responding to perceived problems of capability and capacity. Further research is required to shed light on whether East Lancashire is typical of other CCGs.</p>","PeriodicalId":88096,"journal":{"name":"Quality in primary care","volume":"22 2","pages":"91-9"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2014-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Engaging with clinical commissioning: the attitudes of general practitioners in East Lancashire.\",\"authors\":\"Ian Ashman,&nbsp;Steve Willcocks\",\"doi\":\"\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Clinical commissioning is the centrepiece of government health reforms. Engagement with the reforms is important if they are to bring about improvements in the quality of healthcare. This is important in any healthcare system, not just the UK National Health Service (NHS). This study draws on data from a specially commissioned survey, exploring the extent to which general practitioners (GPs) in East Lancashire are engaged with clinical commissioning. Aim The aim of this study was to assess levels of engagement with clinical commissioning using a Clinical Commissioning Engagement Scale (CCES).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A six-point Likert scale CCES was distributed to all GPs within the boundary of East Lancashire Clinical Commissioning Group (CCG). The GPs are distributed across five localities that vary in terms of geography, demography and previous commissioning experience. The CCES aimed to capture comparative levels of engagement across twelve items, three for each of four dimensions of engagement: (1) personal attitude, (2) perceived capacity, (3) perceived capability and (4) opportunity. Eighty-five returns were received, representing a response rate of 35.3%. A full analysis of the data was conducted using SPSS v. 19.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The results demonstrate concern for capacity and capability across the localities, where mean scores are universally well below the midpoint of the scale. However, attitude and opportunity were relatively positive indicators with mean scores above midpoint for all localities.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The findings highlight the potential challenges for CCGs in engaging GPs and in particular responding to perceived problems of capability and capacity. Further research is required to shed light on whether East Lancashire is typical of other CCGs.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":88096,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Quality in primary care\",\"volume\":\"22 2\",\"pages\":\"91-9\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2014-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Quality in primary care\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Quality in primary care","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","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

背景:临床委托是政府卫生改革的核心。如果要改善医疗保健质量,参与改革是很重要的。这在任何医疗保健系统中都很重要,而不仅仅是英国国家医疗服务体系(NHS)。本研究利用了一项特别委托调查的数据,探讨了东兰开夏郡全科医生(全科医生)参与临床委托的程度。目的本研究的目的是使用临床委托参与量表(CCES)评估临床委托的参与水平。方法:对东兰开夏郡临床试验组(CCG)范围内的所有全科医生发放6分李克特量表CCES。全科医生分布在五个地区,这些地区在地理、人口和以往的委托经验方面各不相同。CCES的目标是捕捉12个项目的相对投入水平,每个项目有3个投入的四个维度:(1)个人态度,(2)感知能力,(3)感知能力和(4)机会。收到85份回复,回复率为35.3%。使用SPSS v. 19对数据进行全面分析。结果:结果表明了对各地能力和能力的关注,平均得分普遍低于量表的中点。然而,态度和机会是相对积极的指标,平均得分在中点以上。结论:研究结果突出了ccg在与全科医生合作方面面临的潜在挑战,特别是在应对能力和能力方面的感知问题。需要进一步的研究来阐明东兰开夏郡是否是其他ccg的典型。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Engaging with clinical commissioning: the attitudes of general practitioners in East Lancashire.

Background: Clinical commissioning is the centrepiece of government health reforms. Engagement with the reforms is important if they are to bring about improvements in the quality of healthcare. This is important in any healthcare system, not just the UK National Health Service (NHS). This study draws on data from a specially commissioned survey, exploring the extent to which general practitioners (GPs) in East Lancashire are engaged with clinical commissioning. Aim The aim of this study was to assess levels of engagement with clinical commissioning using a Clinical Commissioning Engagement Scale (CCES).

Methods: A six-point Likert scale CCES was distributed to all GPs within the boundary of East Lancashire Clinical Commissioning Group (CCG). The GPs are distributed across five localities that vary in terms of geography, demography and previous commissioning experience. The CCES aimed to capture comparative levels of engagement across twelve items, three for each of four dimensions of engagement: (1) personal attitude, (2) perceived capacity, (3) perceived capability and (4) opportunity. Eighty-five returns were received, representing a response rate of 35.3%. A full analysis of the data was conducted using SPSS v. 19.

Results: The results demonstrate concern for capacity and capability across the localities, where mean scores are universally well below the midpoint of the scale. However, attitude and opportunity were relatively positive indicators with mean scores above midpoint for all localities.

Conclusion: The findings highlight the potential challenges for CCGs in engaging GPs and in particular responding to perceived problems of capability and capacity. Further research is required to shed light on whether East Lancashire is typical of other CCGs.

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