Dataset Information

Quality measures in primary care skin cancer management: a qualitative study of the views of key informants.

ABSTRACT:

Objectives

This study explored potential quality measures to improve skin cancer management in primary care settings, and the barriers and facilitators associated with their implementation.

Design

Semistructured interviews and qualitative proforma surveys were conducted with skin cancer experts from a range of healthcare settings. Framework analysis was employed to identify key groups of quality measures within the domains of the Donabedian model of healthcare quality (structure, process, outcome). Interview and survey data were triangulated to identify common groups of quality measures, barriers and facilitators.

Participants

We purposively recruited skin cancer experts from Australia and internationally with knowledge and experience in skin cancer management. The final sample consisted of 15 participants who had clinical or academic backgrounds.

Results

Participants unequivocally expressed the need for quality measures to guide skin cancer care. Ten groups of quality measures were identified: three groups related to the structural elements of care (eg, diagnostic tools), four related to the processes of care (eg, diagnostic process) and three related to outcomes of care (eg, treatment outcomes). Implementation barriers included clinician resistance, system inadequacies and external factors (eg, patient risk). Facilitators included incentives, education, agreed and feasible indicators and support and guidance.

Conclusions

To service a growing population of skin cancer patients in Australia, the role of primary care needs to be more clearly specified, and its care providers supported and more engaged in quality improvement processes. Structure, process and outcome quality measures, derived from detailed guidance for primary care settings, can be used to track practitioner performance and facilitate ongoing improvement.

SUBMITTER: Spanos S

PROVIDER: S-EPMC11243125 | biostudies-literature | 2024 Jul

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Quality measures in primary care skin cancer management: a qualitative study of the views of key informants.

Spanos Samantha S Singh Nehal N Laginha Bela I BI Arnolda Gaston G Smith Andrea L AL Wilkinson David D Cust Anne E AE Braithwaite Jeffrey J Rapport Frances F

BMJ open 20240711 7

<h4>Objectives</h4>This study explored potential quality measures to improve skin cancer management in primary care settings, and the barriers and facilitators associated with their implementation.<h4>Design</h4>Semistructured interviews and qualitative proforma surveys were conducted with skin cancer experts from a range of healthcare settings. Framework analysis was employed to identify key groups of quality measures within the domains of the Donabedian model of healthcare quality (structure, ...[more]

PMID: 38991668

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundLesotho experienced high rates of maternal (566/100,000 live births) and under-five mortality (72.9/1000 live births). A 2013 national assessment found centralized healthcare management in Ministry of Health led to fragmented, ineffective district health team management. Launched in 2014 through collaboration between the Ministry of Health and Partners In Health, Lesotho's Primary Health Care Reform (LPHCR) aimed to improve service quality and quantity by decentralizing healthcare management to the district level. We conducted a qualitative study to explore health workers' perceptions regarding the effectiveness of LPHCR in enhancing the primary health care system.MethodsWe conducted 21 semi-structured key informant interviews (KII) with healthcare workers and Ministry of Health officials purposively sampled from various levels of Lesotho's health system, including the central Ministry of Health, district health management teams, health centers, and community health worker programs in four pilot districts of the LPHCR initiative. The World Health Organization's health systems building blocks framework was used to guide data collection and analysis. Interviews assessed health care workers' perspectives on the impact of the LPHCR initiative on the six-health system building blocks: service delivery, health information systems, access to essential medicines, health workforce, financing, and leadership/governance. Data were analyzed using directed content analysis.ResultsParticipants described benefits of decentralization, including improved efficiency in service delivery, enhanced accountability and responsiveness, increased community participation, improved data availability, and better resource allocation. Participants highlighted how the reform resulted in more efficient procurement and distribution processes and increased recognition and status in part due to the empowerment of district health management teams. However, participants also identified limited decentralization of financial decision-making and encountered barriers to successful implementation, such as staff shortages, inadequate management of the village health worker program, and a lack of clear communication regarding autonomy in utilizing and mobilizing donor funds.ConclusionOur study findings indicate that the implementation of decentralized primary health care management in Lesotho was associated a positive impact on health system building blocks related to primary health care. However, it is crucial to address the implementation challenges identified by healthcare workers to optimize the benefits of decentralized healthcare management.

Project description:BackgroundRising healthcare expenditures places the potential for substitution of hospital care towards primary care high on the political agenda. As low-risk basal cell carcinoma (BCC) care is one of the potential targets for substitution of hospital care towards primary care the objective of this study is to gain insight in the views of healthcare professionals regarding substitution of skin cancer care, and to identify perceived barriers and potential strategies to facilitate substitution.MethodsA qualitative study was conducted consisting of 40 interviews with dermatologists and GPs and three focus groups with 18 selected GPs with noted willingness regarding substitution of skin cancer care. The interviews and focus groups focused on general views, perceived barriers and potential strategies to facilitate substitution of skin cancer care, using predefined topic lists. All sessions were audio-taped, transcribed verbatim and analyzed using the program AtlasTi.ResultsGPs were generally positive regarding substitution of skin care whereas dermatologists expressed more concerns. Lack of trust in GPs to adequately perform skin cancer care and a preference of patients for dermatologists are reported as barriers by dermatologists. The main barriers reported by GPs were a lack of confidence in own skills to perform skin cancer care, a lack of trust from both patients and dermatologists and limited time and financial compensation. Facilitating strategies suggested by both groups mainly focused on improving GPs' education and improving the collaboration between primary and secondary care. GPs additionally suggested efforts from dermatologists to increase their own and patients' trust in GPs, and time and financial compensation. The selected group of GPs suggested practical solutions to facilitate substitution focusing on changes in organizational structure including horizontal referring, outreach models and practice size reduction.ConclusionsGPs and, to lesser extent, dermatologists are positive regarding substitution of low-risk BCC care, though report substantial barriers that need to be addressed before substitution can be further implemented. Aside from essential strategies such as improving GPs' skin cancer education and time and financial compensation, rearranging the organizational structure in primary care and between primary and secondary care may facilitate effective and safe substitution of low-risk BCC care.

Project description:ObjectivesTo explore patient views and perspectives of current management of chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) in primary and secondary care.DesignSemistructured qualitative telephone interviews as part of the MACRO programme (Defining best Management for Adults with Chronic RhinOsinusitis).SettingPrimary care and secondary care ear, nose and throat outpatient clinics in the UK.ParticipantsTwenty-five patients consented to in-depth telephone interviews. Transcribed recordings were managed using NVivo software and analysed using inductive thematic analysis.ResultsCRS has a significant impact on patients' quality of life, affecting their ability to work effectively, their social interactions and daily living. Patients seek help when symptoms become unmanageable, but can become frustrated with the primary care system with difficulties obtaining an appointment, and lack of continuity of care. Patients perceive that general practitioners can be dismissive of CRS symptoms, and patients often prioritise other concerns when they consult. Health system barriers and poor communication can result in delays in accessing appropriate treatment and referral. Adherence to intranasal steroids is a problem and patients are uncertain about correct technique. Nasal irrigation can be time-consuming and difficult for patients to use. Secondary care consultations can appear rushed, and patients would like specialists to take a more 'holistic' approach to their management. Surgery is often considered a temporary solution, appropriate when medical options have been explored.ConclusionsPatients are frustrated with the management of their CRS, and poor communication can result in delays in receiving appropriate treatment and timely referral. Patients seek better understanding of their condition and guidance to support treatments decisions in light of uncertainties around the different medical and surgical options. Better coordinated care between general practice and specialist settings and consistency of advice has the potential to increase patient satisfaction and improve outcomes.

Project description:ObjectivesThe aim of this study is to explore the current and future state of quality measurement and feedback and identify factors influencing measurement feedback systems, including the barriers and enablers to their effective design, implementation, use and translation into quality improvement.DesignThis qualitative study used semistructured interviews with key informants. A deductive framework analysis was conducted to code transcripts to the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF). An inductive analysis was used to produce subthemes and belief statements within each TDF domain.SettingAll interviews were conducted by videoconference and audio-recorded.ParticipantsKey informants were purposively sampled experts in quality measurement and feedback, including clinical (n=5), government (n=5), research (n=4) and health service leaders (n=3) from Australia (n=7), the USA (n=4), the UK (n=2), Canada (n=2) and Sweden (n=2).ResultsA total of 17 key informants participated in the study. The interview length ranged from 48 to 66 min. 12 theoretical domains populated by 38 subthemes were identified as relevant to measurement feedback systems. The most populous domains included environmental context and resources, memory, attention and decision-making, and social influences. The most populous subthemes included 'quality improvement culture', 'financial and human resource support' and 'patient-centred measurement'. There were minimal conflicting beliefs outside of 'data quality and completeness'. Conflicting beliefs in these subthemes were predominantly between government and clinical leaders.ConclusionsMultiple factors were found to influence measurement feedback systems and future considerations are presented within this manuscript. The barriers and enablers that impact these systems are complex. While there are some clear modifiable factors in the design of measurement and feedback processes, influential factors described by key informants were largely socioenvironmental. Evidence-based design and implementation, coupled with a deeper understanding of the implementation context, may lead to enhanced quality measurement feedback systems and ultimately improved care delivery and patient outcomes.

Dataset Information

Quality measures in primary care skin cancer management: a qualitative study of the views of key informants.

Objectives

Design

Participants

Results

Conclusions

Publications

Quality measures in primary care skin cancer management: a qualitative study of the views of key informants.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets