Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

RCGP Quality Team Development programme: an illuminative evaluation.

F Macfarlane1, T Greenhalgh, T Schofield

  • 1University of Surrey, Guildford, Surrey GU2 7XH, UK. f.macfarlane@surrey.ac.uk.

Quality & Safety in Health Care
|October 7, 2004
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Quantifying transmission risk of SARS-CoV-2 in different situations.

BMJ (Clinical research ed.)·2022
Same author

Practical Indicators for Risk of Airborne Transmission in Shared Indoor Environments and Their Application to COVID-19 Outbreaks.

Environmental science & technology·2022
Same author

Co-production of knowledge: the future.

BMJ (Clinical research ed.)·2021
Same author

"I don't know how I'm still standing" a Bakhtinian analysis of social housing and health narratives in East London.

Social science & medicine (1982)·2017
Same author

"Everyone was looking at you smiling": East London residents' experiences of the 2012 Olympics and its legacy on the social determinants of health.

Health & place·2015
Same author

Protocol for an HTA report: Does therapeutic writing help people with long-term conditions? Systematic review, realist synthesis and economic modelling.

BMJ open·2014
Same journal

Organisational culture: variation across hospitals and connection to patient safety climate.

Quality & safety in health care·2010
Same journal

The Rhode Island ICU collaborative: a model for reducing central line-associated bloodstream infection and ventilator-associated pneumonia statewide.

Quality & safety in health care·2010
Same journal

Assessing and improving safety culture throughout an academic medical centre: a prospective cohort study.

Quality & safety in health care·2010
Same journal

The WHO patient safety curriculum guide for medical schools.

Quality & safety in health care·2010
Same journal

Preventing ethics conflicts and improving healthcare quality through system redesign.

Quality & safety in health care·2010
Same journal

Improvement leaders: what do they and should they do? A summary of a review of research.

Quality & safety in health care·2010
See all related articles

The Quality Team Development (QTD) programme is valued by primary healthcare teams for improving teamwork and patient services. Further research is needed to understand participation barriers in typical practices.

Area of Science:

  • Healthcare Management
  • Quality Improvement
  • Primary Care Research

Background:

  • Growing interest in locally owned, team-based, multiprofessional, formative quality initiatives.
  • The Royal College of General Practitioners' Quality Team Development (QTD) programme aims to enhance primary healthcare teams and services.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To evaluate the QTD programme from the perspectives of participants and assessors.
  • Assessing the feasibility, acceptability, and impact of the QTD programme in UK primary care.

Main Methods:

  • Qualitative study involving 12 practices and 4 primary care organisations (PCOs) in the UK.
  • Thirty-four semi-structured interviews with key stakeholders, analyzed using the constant comparative method.

Related Experiment Videos

Main Results:

  • Participating organizations highly valued the QTD programme, reporting positive changes in teamwork and patient services.
  • Respondents found the programme acceptable and feasible, appreciating its formative, participative, and multiprofessional nature, particularly peer review.
  • PCOs viewed QTD as a tool for policy delivery and interorganizational collaboration, though workload and assessment quality were concerns.

Conclusions:

  • The QTD programme shows positive benefits for participating primary healthcare teams.
  • The study population represents an innovative, self-selecting minority; further research is needed in typical practices.
  • Identifying barriers to participation in QTD and similar formative, team-based quality improvement programs is crucial.