These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Measuring mechanisms for quality assurance in primary care systems in transition: test of a new instrument in Slovenia and Uzbekistan.
    Author: Kringos DS, Boerma W, Pellny M.
    Journal: Qual Prim Care; 2009; 17(3):165-77. PubMed ID: 19622267.
    Abstract:
    BACKGROUND: This World Health Organization (WHO) study aimed to develop and field test an instrument to assess the availability of structures and mechanisms for managing quality in primary care in countries in transition. METHOD: The instrument is based on a literature study, consensus meetings with experts, and observations in these countries. It consists of three parts: a semi-structured questionnaire on national policies and mechanisms; a structured questionnaire for general practitioners (GPs); and a structured questionnaire for use with managers of primary care facilities. The instrument has been field tested in 2007 in Slovenia and Uzbekistan. RESULTS: In Slovenia, leadership on quality improvement was weak and local managers reported few incentives and resources to control quality. There was a lack of external support for quality improvement activities. Availability and use of clinical guidelines for GPs were not optimal. GPs found teamwork and communication with patients inadequate. In Uzbekistan, primary care quality and standards in health centres were extensively regulated and laid down in numerous manuals, instructions and other documents. Managers, however, indicated the need for more financial and non-financial levers for quality improvement and they wanted to know more about modern healthcare management. GPs reported strong involvement in activities such as peer review and clinical audit, and reported frequent use of clinical guidelines. Overall, the information gathered with the provisional instrument has resulted in policy recommendations. At the same time, the pilot resulted in improvements to the instrument. CONCLUSION: Application of the instrument helps decision makers to identify improvement areas in the infrastructure for managing the quality of primary care.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]