Combining administrative data feedback, reflection and action planning to engage primary care professionals in quality improvement: qualitative assessment of short term program outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Improving primary care for chronic disease management requires a coherent, integrated approach to quality improvement. Evidence in the continuing professional development (CPD) field suggests the importance of using strategies such as feedback delivery, reflective practice and action planning to facilitate recognition of gaps and service improvement needs. Our study explored the outcomes of a CPD intervention, named the COMPAS Project, which consists of a three-hour workshop composed of three main activities: feedback, critical reflection and action planning. The feedback intervention is delivered face-to-face and presents performance indicators extracted from clinical-administrative databases. This aim of this study was to assess the short term outcomes of this intervention to engage primary care professional in continuous quality improvement (QI). METHODS: In order to develop an understanding of our intervention and of its short term outcomes, a program evaluation approach was used. Ten COMPAS workshops on diabetes management were directly observed and qualitative data was collected to assess the intervention short term outcomes. Data from both sources were combined to describe the characteristics of action plans developed by professionals. Two independent coders analysed the content of these plans to assess if they promoted engagement in QI and interprofessional collaboration. RESULTS: During the ten workshops held, 26 interprofessional work teams were formed. Twenty-two of them developed a QI project they could implement themselves and that targeted aspects of their own practice they perceived in need of change. Most frequently prioritized strategies for change were improvement of systematic clientele follow-up, medication compliance, care pathway and support to improve adoption of healthier life habits. Twenty-one out of 22 action plans were found to target some level of improvement of interprofessional collaboration in primary care. DISCUSSION: Our study results demonstrate that the COMPAS intervention enabled professionals to target priorities for practice improvements and to develop action plans that promote interprofessional collaboration. The COMPAS intervention aims to increase capability for continuous QI, readiness to implement process of care changes and team shared goals but available resources, climate and culture for change and leadership, are also important required conditions to successfully implement these practice changes. CONCLUSION: We think that the proposed approach can be very useful to support and engage primary care professionals in the planning stage of quality improvement projects since it combines key successful ingredients: feedback, reflection and planning of action.

Engaging primary care practitioners in quality improvement: making explicit the program theory of an interprofessional education intervention.

BACKGROUND: The scientific literature continues to advocate interprofessional collaboration (IPC) as a key component of primary care. It is recommended that primary care groups be created and configured to meet the healthcare needs of the patient population, as defined by patient demographics and other data analyses related to the health of the population being served. It is further recommended that the improvement of primary care services be supported by the delivery of feedback and performance measurements. This paper describes the theory underlying an interprofessional educational intervention developed in Quebec's Montérégie region (Canada) for the purpose of improving chronic disease management in primary care. The objectives of this study were to explain explicitly the theory underlying this intervention, to describe its components in detail and to assess the intervention's feasibility and acceptability. METHOD: A program impact theory-driven evaluation approach was used. Multiple sources of information were examined to make explicit the theory underlying the education intervention: 1) a literature review and a review of documents describing the program's development; 2) regular attendance at the project's committee meetings; 3) direct observation of the workshops; 4) interviews of workshop participants; and 5) focus groups with workshop facilitators. Qualitative data collected were analysed using thematic analysis. RESULTS: The theoretical basis of the interprofessional education intervention was found to be work motivation theory and reflective learning. Five themes describing the workshop objectives emerged from the qualitative analysis of the interviews conducted with the workshop participants. These five themes were the importance of: 1) adopting a regional perspective, 2) reflecting, 3) recognizing gaps between practice and guidelines, 4) collaborating, and 5) identifying possible practice improvements. The team experienced few challenges implementing the intervention. However, the workshop's acceptability was found to be very good. CONCLUSION: Our observation of the workshop sessions and the interviews conducted with the participants confirmed that the objectives of the education intervention indeed targeted the improvement of interprofessional collaboration and quality of care. However, it is clear that a three-hour workshop alone cannot lead to major changes in practice. Long-term interventions are needed to support this complex change process.

Development and validation of competencies for return to work coordinators.

INTRODUCTION: Return to work (RTW) coordinators are a key element in programs that facilitate RTW of injured or ill workers, yet little research documents the competencies required for success in this role. METHODS: Competencies were defined as knowledge, skills, attitudes, and behaviors. Eight focus groups were conducted with 75 experienced RTW coordinators to identify 904 individual competencies. These were subsequently reduced to 234 unique items through affinity mapping, and sorted into eight groups: administration, individual personal attributes, information gathering, communication, professional credibility, evaluation, problem-solving, and conflict management. A subset of 100 items, including 88 items most often cited, were incorporated in an Internet-based survey that sampled a broad range of RTW coordinators from three countries. RESULTS: Eighty-three of the questionnaire items were rated 4 or 5 (very important or essential) by over half of the 148 respondents. There were no differences in affinity group mean ratings by country, employer, profession, or type of clients. The highest-rated items reflect general personal characteristics, or specific skills related to coordinating among all involved with the RTW process. RTW coordinators with nursing backgrounds provided slightly higher ratings for items related to medical knowledge, but otherwise their ratings were similar to non-nurses. CONCLUSIONS: These findings indicate a consensus across a wide range of RTW coordinators, and results can be applied to improve coordinator selection, training, and development. Certain key competencies may be well-established individual attributes, and others may be best developed through mentorship. Most of these competencies are probably best evaluated by direct observation.