Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Quality clusters in general practice: associations between cluster organization and general practitioners’ self-reported benefits

Quality clusters in general practice: associations between cluster organization and general... BackgroundQuality clusters were introduced as a quality improvement concept in Danish general practice in 2018. This new concept anchored quality improvement in local clusters managed by general practitioners (GPs).ObjectivesTo describe the cluster organization and GPs’ self-reported benefits of participating in them and explore the associations between cluster organization and self-reported benefits.MethodsA national survey in Danish general practice gathering information about cluster organization (cluster size, cluster meetings, participants, and content) and GPs’ self-reported benefits (overall benefit, internal changes in the clinic, and improved external collaboration).ResultsOne hundred and eight (95%) clusters and 1,219 GPs (36%) were included. Cluster size varied from 10 to 68 GPs (34 GPs on average). Approximately 70% of GPs reported moderate to very high overall benefit from cluster participation. Most GPs experienced changes in their clinic organization (68%), drug prescriptions (78%), and patient care (77%). Collaboration was reported improved between the GPs (86%), municipality (50%), and hospital (36.2%). GPs in clusters with 3–6 planned meetings per year (odds ratio [OR] 1.9; confidence interval [CI] 1.3–2.9), mixed meeting types (OR 1.7; CI 1.2–2.4), group work (OR 1.7; CI 1.1–2.5), and use of guidelines in their meetings (OR 1.8; CI 1.3–2.4) had statistically significantly higher odds for reporting overall benefit of participating in clusters compared with GPs in clusters without these characteristics.ConclusionsFrequent and active meetings with a relevant meeting content are positively related to GPs’ perceived benefits and with improved collaboration between GPs in the clusters. There seems to be a potential for developing collaboration with other healthcare providers. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Family Practice Oxford University Press

Quality clusters in general practice: associations between cluster organization and general practitioners’ self-reported benefits

Loading next page...
 
/lp/oxford-university-press/quality-clusters-in-general-practice-associations-between-cluster-8LeZca0FTS

References (14)

Publisher
Oxford University Press
Copyright
© The Author(s) 2022. Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.
ISSN
0263-2136
eISSN
1460-2229
DOI
10.1093/fampra/cmac011
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

BackgroundQuality clusters were introduced as a quality improvement concept in Danish general practice in 2018. This new concept anchored quality improvement in local clusters managed by general practitioners (GPs).ObjectivesTo describe the cluster organization and GPs’ self-reported benefits of participating in them and explore the associations between cluster organization and self-reported benefits.MethodsA national survey in Danish general practice gathering information about cluster organization (cluster size, cluster meetings, participants, and content) and GPs’ self-reported benefits (overall benefit, internal changes in the clinic, and improved external collaboration).ResultsOne hundred and eight (95%) clusters and 1,219 GPs (36%) were included. Cluster size varied from 10 to 68 GPs (34 GPs on average). Approximately 70% of GPs reported moderate to very high overall benefit from cluster participation. Most GPs experienced changes in their clinic organization (68%), drug prescriptions (78%), and patient care (77%). Collaboration was reported improved between the GPs (86%), municipality (50%), and hospital (36.2%). GPs in clusters with 3–6 planned meetings per year (odds ratio [OR] 1.9; confidence interval [CI] 1.3–2.9), mixed meeting types (OR 1.7; CI 1.2–2.4), group work (OR 1.7; CI 1.1–2.5), and use of guidelines in their meetings (OR 1.8; CI 1.3–2.4) had statistically significantly higher odds for reporting overall benefit of participating in clusters compared with GPs in clusters without these characteristics.ConclusionsFrequent and active meetings with a relevant meeting content are positively related to GPs’ perceived benefits and with improved collaboration between GPs in the clusters. There seems to be a potential for developing collaboration with other healthcare providers.

Journal

Family PracticeOxford University Press

Published: Mar 18, 2022

Keywords: general practice; primary healthcare; quality circles; Quality of Health Care; Surveys and Questionnaires; quality improvement

There are no references for this article.