Abrahamson, Vanessa, Jaswal, Sabrena, Wilson, Patricia M. (2020) An evaluation of the clinical microsystems approach in general practice quality improvement. Primary Health Care Research & Development, 21 . ISSN 1463-4236. (doi:10.1017/S1463423620000158) (KAR id:81030)
PDF
Publisher pdf
Language: English
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
|
|
Download this file (PDF/417kB) |
Preview |
Request a format suitable for use with assistive technology e.g. a screenreader | |
PDF
Author's Accepted Manuscript
Language: English Restricted to Repository staff only DOI for this version: 10.22024/UniKent/01.02.81030.3207005 |
|
Contact us about this Publication
|
![]() |
Official URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S1463423620000158 |
Abstract
Background: Changes to the general practice (GP) contract in England (April 2019) introduced a new quality improvement (QI) domain. The clinical microsystems programme is an approach to QI with limited evidence in primary care. Aim: To explore experiences of GP staff participating in a clinical microsystems programme. Design and setting: GPs within one clinical commissioning group (CCG) in South East England. Normalisation process theory informed qualitative approach. Method: Review of all CCG clinical microsystems projects using pre-existing data. The Diffusion of Innovation Cycle was used to inform the sampling frame and GPs were invited to participate in interviews or focus groups. Ten practices participated; 11 coaches and 16 staff were interviewed. Results: The majority of projects were process-driven activities related to dministrative systems. Projects directly related to health outputs were fewer and related to externally imposed targets. Four key elements facilitated practices to engage: feeling in control; receiving enhanced service payment; having a senior staff member championing the approach; and good practice–coach relationship. There appeared to be three key benefits in addition to project-specific ones: improved working relationships between CCG and practice; more cohesive practice team; and time to reflect. Conclusion: Small projects with clear parameters were more successful than larger ones or those spanning organisations. However, there was little evidence suggesting the key benefits were unique attributes of the microsystems approach and sustainability was problematic. Future research should focus on cross-organisational approaches to QI and identify what, if any, added value the approach provides.
Item Type: | Article |
---|---|
DOI/Identification number: | 10.1017/S1463423620000158 |
Uncontrolled keywords: | general practice; primary healthcare; quality improvement; qualitative research; implementation science |
Subjects: | H Social Sciences |
Divisions: | Divisions > Division for the Study of Law, Society and Social Justice > School of Social Policy, Sociology and Social Research > Centre for Health Services Studies |
Depositing User: | Vanessa Abrahamson |
Date Deposited: | 28 Apr 2020 12:15 UTC |
Last Modified: | 05 Nov 2024 12:46 UTC |
Resource URI: | https://kar.kent.ac.uk/id/eprint/81030 (The current URI for this page, for reference purposes) |
- Link to SensusAccess
- Export to:
- RefWorks
- EPrints3 XML
- BibTeX
- CSV
- Depositors only (login required):