Prioritizing areas for quality marker development in children in UK general practice: extending the use of the

Peter J Gill1, Paul Hewitson, Ed Peile

  • 1Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, 2nd Floor, 23--38 Hythe Bridge Street, Oxford OX1 2ET, UK. peter.gill@phc.ox.ac.uk

Family Practice
|February 7, 2012
PubMed

Insights

UK General Practitioners (GPs) identified key areas for improving children's primary care quality. Using the nominal group technique (NGT), they prioritized essential clinical domains for quality marker development.

Area of Science:

  • Paediatric Primary Care Quality Improvement
  • Healthcare Professional Consensus Building
  • Clinical Quality Measurement

Background:

  • Lack of standardized methods to assess the quality of paediatric primary care.
  • Absence of professional agreement within UK general practice on essential quality markers for child healthcare.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To establish priority clinical areas for developing quality markers in paediatric primary care.
  • To identify challenges inherent in achieving professional consensus on these markers.

Main Methods:

  • Convened an expert panel of General Practitioners (GPs) with a focus on child health.
  • Employed the nominal group technique (NGT), a structured facilitation method, to build consensus.

Main Results:

  • Identified eight key areas: early recognition of serious illness, safeguarding, health promotion, mental health, evidence-based management, child/carer friendliness, and prescribing.
  • Encountered challenges in balancing broad clinical scope with specific focus, managing uncertainty, and preventing 'everything-must-go' tendencies.

Conclusions:

  • First consensus study among UK GPs to define priority areas for paediatric primary care quality marker development.
  • Nominal group technique effectively highlighted frontline professionals' priorities and illuminated consensus-building challenges in a complex field.
Abstract

Related Concept Videos

Methods of Documentation II: POMR01:26

Methods of Documentation II: POMR

The Problem-Oriented Medical Record (POMR) revolutionized medical record-keeping by introducing a systematic approach focusing on the patient's problems rather than merely listing symptoms. Dr. Lawrence Weed's introduction of this method in the 1960s marked a significant advancement in medical documentation. The POMR framework consists of four key components: the database, problem list, plan of care, and progress notes.
Sampling Plans01:23

Sampling Plans

Sampling is a crucial step in analytical chemistry, allowing researchers to collect representative data from a large population. Common sampling methods include random, judgmental, systematic, stratified, and cluster sampling.
Random sampling is a method where each member of the population has an equal chance of being selected for the sample. It involves selecting individuals randomly, often using random number generators or lottery-type methods. For example, when analyzing the properties of a...
Methods of Documentation IV: Focus Charting01:26

Methods of Documentation IV: Focus Charting

Focus Charting, also known as the focus charting system or "focus documentation," is a systematic documentation approach used in healthcare to organize patient information in medical records.
It typically involves three columns for recording information:
Group Therapy01:26

Group Therapy

Group therapy is a sociocultural approach to psychological treatment, where individuals with shared psychological challenges come together under the guidance of a mental health professional. This therapeutic modality offers unique opportunities for individuals to connect, share, and grow within the context of a supportive group. By fostering mutual understanding and collaboration, group therapy can address a range of psychological concerns effectively, often complementing or surpassing the...
Group Design02:01

Group Design

The most basic experimental design involves two groups: the experimental group and the control group. The two groups are designed to be the same except for one difference— experimental manipulation. The experimental group gets the experimental manipulation—that is, the treatment or variable being tested—and the control group does not. Since experimental manipulation is the only difference between the experimental and control groups, we can be sure that any differences between the two are due to...