Presentation on theme: "Audit for Registrars Dr. Ramesh Mehay Course Organiser Bradford VTS NOTE : Key points = core points to note for any sytematic approach to audit."— Presentation transcript:
Audit for Registrars Dr. Ramesh Mehay Course Organiser Bradford VTS NOTE : Key points = core points to note for any sytematic approach to audit
Definition Clinical audit is the systematic and critical analysis of the quality of clinical care. This includes the procedures used for diagnosis and treatment, the associated use of resources and the effect of care on the outcome and quality of life for the patient. Clinical Governance = improving standards
Crombie et al. defined Audit as the process of reviewing the delivery of health care to identify deficiencies so that they may be remedied. Marinker (1990) the attempt to improve quality of medical care by measuring the performance in relation to desired standards and by improving on this performance
Definition – less formal Taking note of what we do Learning from it Changing it if necessary With the aim of improving care
Why do It? Development of professional education and self regulation Improvement of quality of patient care Increasing accountability Improvement of motivation and teamwork Aiding in the assessment of needs As a stimulus to research Clinical audit aims to lead to an improvement in the quality of service providing:- improved care of patients enhanced professionalism of staff efficient use of resources aid to continuing education aid to administration accountability to those outside the profession
Fundamental Principles All about improving patient care Should be seen as part of day to day practice Developing a critical eye on what we are doing Trying to improve things all the time
The Audit Cycle What Should Be Happening What Is Happening? What changes are needed
The Audit Cycle
What Audit Is Not Not about: Performance Appraisal of Staff Disciplinary Actions Needs Assessment Research (which is usually about establishing new knowledge) Computers and Statistics Competition between doctors Never judge good and bad professionals based on audit – it is about improving care
Audit vs Research ResearchAudit Defines Good PracticeAssess extent to which good practice is being obeyed/improvements May involve allocating pts to random treatment groups Never involves this May involve placebo RxNever involves placebo Rx Disturbs the pt beyond that required for normal clinical management Never does this May involvea completely new treatment Never involves a completely new treatment One off processOngoing Other notes Both audit and Research are concerned with clinical practice effectiveness Audit can contribute to research – issues that need further exploration
When to Use What MethodWhen to use itWhy ResearchGood practice is not defined and comparisons are needed To define good practice Data Collection or structured observation Practice patterns unknown To catalogue prevailing practice without making judgements AuditGood practice is defined but we want to know how much we are sticking to it To improve current performance
Does Audit Lead to Change Hearnshaw et al, BJGP 1998 Of 1257 audits Around 80% on clinical care Around 65% led to change
Making Audit Easier – Avoid the Blocks BEFORE YOU START Time – big audits can eat up time in an already busy schedule, so : Keep it simple and small Look at one or two criteria Engage the whole team – otherwise it will be difficult! Is the team ready? (Enthusiasm, wanting to improve) WHEN YOU START Delegate & Share the workload – involve others Make life easier – use computers to do the laborious stuff (patient searches) Use protocols / standards already laid by others (why re-invent the wheel?) Be careful of data collection – choose a topic which does not entail too much data collection to the extent it becomes exhaustive with subsequent loss of enthusiasm
Some Ideas You can do an Audit of Structure ie facilities being provided Eg waiting times, availability of staff, record keeping (all patient records should have a summary card), equipment Process ie what was done to the patient eg referrals, prescribing, investigations Aspirin post MI, BP measurements 5 yearly in those aged Outcome ie result for the patient Eg patient satisfaction, patients with high BP aged between should have a diastolic below 90mmHg within the first year of treatment high risk practices (significant event audits) eg pneumococcal vaccines in splenectomised patients, are significant events being acted upon? The outcome is the ideal indicator for care but the most difficult to measure.
Choosing a Topic Condition has an important impact on health or of great local concern KEY POINT ie serious consequences otherwise Condition affects a large number of people Good reasons for believing current performance can be improved or improvements are needed KEY POINT Convincing evidence about appropriate care is available Data collection – choose a topic which does not entail too much data collection to the extent it becomes exhaustive with subsequent loss of enthusiasm (? A pilot??) CHOOSE SOMETHING THAT REALLY INTERESTS YOU NO POINT AUDITING SOMETHING YOU THINK THE PRACTICE IS DOING REALLY WELL Then discuss with others – are they interested too?
Choosing a Topic Remember, topic should be important : Chronic Disease Management eg referrals or use of lab services (INRs in warfarin) Preventative Care eg childhood imms, Cervical Cytology Prescribing eg aspirin post MI, PPIs (cost issue)
Examples Ways of spotting audit topics examples Important clinical events admissions for asthma Significant events patient died of MI – no record of smoking history or BP Patients' complaints too long to get an appointment Observation no system for ensuring bag drugs up to date Observations of staff patient on Warfarin not had INR for 6 months NICE subjects post-MI patients on aspirin
Criteria = yardsticks An audit criterion is a specific statement of what should be happening. A statement which A) defines a measurable item of health care which B) can be used to assess quality KEYPOINT Criteria should be explicit. You must demonstrate evidence for justifying them (literature search, Evidence Based!).
Criteria – KEY POINTS Ensure that the criterion is measurable – · asthmatics should have had yearly PFs is difficult to measure (how many years will you go back?); · asthmatics should have had a PF recorded in the past year is more practical. Dont try to audit too many criteria at once – one or two will keep you busy enough. Try filling in the gaps of the following phrase to set your audit criterion: All patients with xxxxx should have had a xxxxx in the last xxxxx.
Criteria "All eligible women aged should have had a cervical smear in the last 5 years." All asthmatics should have had a Peak Flow recorded in the past year. All drugs in our doctors bags should be in-date.
Standards An audit standard is a minimum level of acceptable performance for that criterion. Make sure the standard is directly related to the criterion, also :- Should include a suitable timeframe
Standards Examples: "At least 80% of eligible women aged should have had a cervical smear in the last 5 years." At least 60% of asthmatics should have had a Peak Flow recorded in the past year. 100% of drugs in our doctors bags should be in-date. The standard should reflect the clinical and medico-legal importance of the criterion. in the example above, 80% of women should have had a cervical smear, But of those who've had an abnormal smear, 100% should have had action taken.
Standards How to set standards Look at national guidelines Literature (journals), textbooks Local guidelines Discussion with consultants/GPSIs Discussion with trainer/partners KEY POINT : Standards set should be realistic and attainable. Justifiable reasons for the standard set should be made explicitly clear.
Standards Some criteria are so important that they need 100% standard. However, 100% standards are unusual – patients or circumstances usually conspire against perfection and the standard needs to reflect that. Your literature search should give you an idea of what standards others have managed to reach. Your standard needs to follow on directly from your criterion – for example, Patients on thyroxine should have had TFTs done in the last year; this should have happened in at least 90% of patients.
TYING IT ALL TOGETHER Examples of Standards & Criteria CriteriaStandards All children under 2 years should be immunised against tetanus and polio 90% of registered patients under the age of 2 years should have been immunised against polio and tetanus All notes of those patients with an allergy to penicillin should be marked 95% of patients with an allergy to penicillin should be clearly marked All patients in the surgery should wait no longer than 30 minutes before a consultation 70% of patients in the surgery should wait no longer than 30 minutes before a consultation
Preparation & Planning Must show evidence of teamwork – otherwise you will fail
Data Collection (1) You can collect information from: computer registers review of contents of medical records questionnaires – patients, staff or GPs data collection sheets
Data Collection Be careful of data collection – choose a topic which does not entail too much data collection to the extent it becomes exhaustive with subsequent loss of enthusiasm ? Sampling – random or systemic Only collect essential information Use computers, ?data collection forms Use other staff & delegate – dont do all the work yourself Set a deadline
Presenting the Results Collect Results Analyse Results Summarise Results Present Results to the team Simple arithmetic calculations Use percentages Results of 2 nd data collection presented in the same way as the 1 st
Discussion – Data Collection 1
Comparing Results to Standards CriterionStandardObserved Result All patients should be seen within 15 minutes of their appointment timeMinimum 70%45% 70%45%All diabetics to have had HbA1C in last 3 monthsMinimum 95%90% 90%Drug allergies to be marked as active problem on computerMinimum 100%95%
Discussion – Data Collection (1) KEY POINT (Discussion of Data Collection 1) : You need to explain why you think the practice didn't meet the standard that was set.
Discussion – why standards not met Think: What reasons are there for practices not meeting audit standards? For example : reasons have included: Practice reasons: · Results having been put down as free text on computer, rather than coded; · Opportunistic rather than formal recall system in use; Doctor reasons: · Not all GPs were aware of the practice policy; · Not all partners agreed with the policy; Patient reasons: · Patients refusing to have tests done; · Patients on holiday when tests due.
Implementing Changes The most challenging stage Audit can tell you whether changes are needed, but it cant tell you what methods to use
Implementing Change The changes to be implemented should be a team discussion and decision (?a practice meeting) What to do at the Practice Meeting: Emphasise what has been achieved. What are we proud of? What are we not so proud of? How can we correct any deficiencies?
Implementing Change Changes must be practical! How are you actually going to make the changes? Simply saying Weve got to do better wont result in change You need to think through in detail · what needs to be done · whos going to do it · when · and how. If you get very low results, you may consider resetting the standards to a more realistic level (but justify it)
Implementing Change KEYPOINT Just telling people to do things better won't result in change. You need to write up in some detail how the changes will take place. FAIL Example: "The GPs agreed to do a serum rhubarb on any patient that they see who is on Viagra" - fail - this wouldn't be likely to pass, as there is no system to help them remember. PASS Example : (a) The GPs were given a prompt card that they could stick on their computer screen as a reminder to do a serum rhubarb on any patient that they see who is on Viagra; (b) the secretary will search every three months for patients who are overdue for their serum rhubarb, and flag it as an active problem on the computer system" - pass - as it should result in change.
Closing the Loop Ie repeating the cycle Re-evaluate care to ensure that any remedial action has been effective. Audit is a continuous cycle – if you didnt meet the standard and youve planned changes, youll need to repeat the audit to make sure the changes have happened.
Conclusions from the Audit Summary of main issues learned KEYPOINTS: Comment on any improvements that have resulted. How well did your proposals for change work? If you again didn't reach the standard that you set, why not? If you did, should you be aiming higher next time, or look at something else e.g. whether abnormal serum rhubarbs have actually been acted on? Where should the practice go from here
Useful Resources MAAGs – medical audit advisory groups Clinical Governance Advisory Groups National/Local Guidelines RCGP database of simple tested audits for day-to-day use Literature, Books The WWW Consultants, GPSIs, Trainers, Partners
How To Fail No justification for choice of audit No justification for criteria/standard settings Not having explicit criteria/standards Setting unreasonable standards A general lack of evidence based literature or using material that is not peer referenced Not explicitly displaying teamwork in the method – must give specific examples Numerical errors re: data collection Presentation of data collection eg no graphs, no percentages (ie the reader has to do the hardwork him/herself) Not giving much thought to changes to be evaluated and not being specific enough. Not delegating specific changes to specific people/persons. Poor conclusions and what the process has taught you No inclusion for possible sources of bias References not properly quoted
IF YOU DONT WANT TO FAIL Go through the following online tutorial Look at the Marking Schedule – (yes, they provide you with an answer sheet!) You must pass on all 8 criteria.
SHOs doing Audit for Summative Assessment If you are doing the audit while an SHO, you need to choose a topic that looks at the GP- hospital interface. Referrals or discharge letters are possible areas for audit. Again, you need to demonstrate that you've found a problem that needs to be investigated. I suggest that you discuss your proposed audit with your GP Scheme Organiser before you go ahead - your hospital colleagues may not know what's needed for Summative Assessment.
Checking GPR Understanding DISCUSS THE FOLLOWING STATEMENTS An example of the Audit of process is audit of referrals to hospitals. Audit usually consumes an extensive amount of resources (of time, money etc.). Rare conditions should be audited. The higher the standard the practitioner starts with, the stronger is the resulting audit. Maintaining clearly written notes of at least 20% of patients who are sensitive to penicillin is an acceptable standard in general practice. The higher the amount of data the practitioner collects, the easier is the decision making process in audit. The most challenging stage in Audit is implementing change. In data collection all in the target population must be included. The agreed standards can be reset at realistic percentages after the first round of data collection.
Clinical Audit Association Ltd Clinical Audit Association Ltd Cleethorpes Centre Jackson Place Wilton Road Hunberton Lincolnshire DN36 4AS Tel:
Clinical Governance Research and Development Unit Dept of General Practice and Primary Health Care University of Leicester Leicester General Hospital Gwendolen Rd Leicester LE5 4PW Tel: Fax:
Cochrane Database of Systematic Review c/o British Medical Association BMA House Tavistock Square London WC1H 9JP
NICE 11 Strand London WC2N 5HR Tel: Fax:
RCGP Effective Clinical Practice Unit School of Health and Related Research Regent Court 30 Regent Street Sheffield S1 4DA Tel: Fax:
RCGP NE Scotland Faculty The Primary Care Resource Centre Foresterhill Road Aberdeen AB25 2ZP Tel: Fax: nescot/index.asphttp://www.rcgp.org.uk/rcgp/faculties/ nescot/index.asp
UK Cochrane Centre Dr Iain Chalmers, Director NHS Research and Development Programme Summertown Pavilion Middle Way Oxford OX2 7LG Tel:
Cochrane Collaboration in the field of primary care For information concerning work by the Cochrane Collaboration in the field of primary care, contact: Dr Lorne Becker Professor and Chair Dept of Family Medicine SUNY Upstate Medical University 475 Irving Avenue Syracuse, NY USA Tel: Fax: default.html
NHS Centre for Reviews and Dissemination University of York York, YO1 5DD Tel: Fax:
Sources This power point has been derived from : udit.pdfhttp://kims.org.kw/bulletin/Issues/issue2/A udit.pdf