Jump to: Page Content, Site Navigation, Site Search,
You are seeing this message because your web browser does not support basic web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.
Alastair McColl a Woolpit Health Centre, Bury St
Edmunds IP30 9QU, b National Primary Care Research and Development
Centre, University of Manchester, Manchester M13 9PL
Correspondence to: A McColl a.mccoll{at}ukgateway.net
The new requirements of clinical governance are a challenge
for everyone working in the NHS. If the quality of health care is to be
improved, existing knowledge about effective clinical and
organisational practice must be applied and new information to monitor
and evaluate care must be generated and interpreted.
Within individual general practices and primary care teams, all staff
will have a role in obtaining and using information for clinical
governance In this paper, we discuss the additional knowledge that will be
needed by all staff working in primary care and the challenges faced by
leaders of primary care groups and trusts. We suggest where they can
find relevant information. Everyone in primary care needs to be
familiar with these sources if clinical governance is to succeed as a
way to improve the quality of health care.
whether for maintaining chronic disease registers,
promoting evidence based practice, improving the organisation of
services, or reporting on the outcomes of care. In primary care groups
and trusts, there is greater emphasis on improving the health of the
population. This requires the collection and aggregation of information
across practices to assess health needs, reduce inequalities, and
monitor the quality of care in comparison to agreed standards.
Summary points
Everyone in primary care needs to be familiar with the
requirements of clinical governance if it is to succeed as a way to
improve the quality of care
Producing, collecting, and analysing primary care information is
difficult, but some practices have already overcome these barriers
Individuals and primary care group and trust leaders can do much to
promote clinical governance, but problems remain
Clinical governance has highlighted the need for additional knowledge
and information on determinants of population health
Many problems exist with producing, collecting, and analysing the
necessary information; we aim to provide examples of pragmatic approaches to overcome these barriers. (The version of this paper on
the BMJ's website includes numerous URLs to show what
information is available). Other, harder to measure aspects of quality
care such as communication and continuity may increasingly be
overlooked.1
| |
Practices and practitioners: knowledge and information for improved clinical practice |
|---|
|
|
|---|
The many dimensions of clinical governance outlined by Rosen highlight the wide range of information which primary care staff will need to use.2 Effective clinical practice requires access to and use of evidence based guidance on cost effective care. To implement national service frameworks and local health improvement priorities, staff will need to understand what these priorities are and monitor progress towards agreed standards. Pringle's paper on developing individuals for clinical governance emphasised the need for clinicians to find information which will improve their own practice and aid learning in the primary care team as a whole.3 Such work is likely to go a long way towards fulfilling the General Medical Council's requirements for revalidation. The following section outlines important sources of knowledge and information in relation to each of these key areas.
Clinical knowledge for evidence based practice
Many sources of information on cost-effective interventions
are available to help clinical management in primary care (see table A
on the BMJ's website). Skills in critical appraisal are
important, and there are many courses to help make sense of information
on cost effective interventions. Asking a well defined question and
knowing about sources of information are important first
steps.4
the national electronic library for health
will eventually help
to improve access to information in the practice.5 In one
English region only 20% of general practitioners had access to
bibliographic databases in their surgeries and 17% had access to the
world wide web.6 Primary care groups and trusts will need
to invest in adequate information technology hardware, software, and
training. To avoid duplication of effort, relevant information should
be coordinated at a national level and facilitated locally through
postgraduate libraries.
Computerised clinical decision support systems used during
consultations can help to improve performance and patient
outcomes.7 In England and Wales, Prodigy software is
available free of charge on 85% of computer systems; it can offer
advice during consultations on what to do in over 150 conditions
commonly seen in primary care.
|
Computerising information to monitor care
Practices will have to provide data relating to quality
indicators identified as national and local priorities. Standards set
in the national service frameworks provide examples of national
priorities for quality improvement which must be monitored locally.
for example, computerised recall systems help ensure that patients with diseases such as diabetes and
hypertension are seen at least annually and that they are receiving
optimal treatment. However, information on individual diagnoses
must be entered on the practice's computer. In some parts of the
country virtually all general practitioners are doing this already as part of their routine daily work, but for other doctors it will be a
big change.
In the long run, it will be easier for clinicians to learn how to
record key diagnoses by using computerised Read codes rather than
relying on laborious searches of notes. Some practices have not yet
been computerised, and individual doctors vary in their ability to
enter patients' data on their practice's system. Many health
authorities and computer system suppliers run courses on data entry,
and some primary care groups are already encouraging clinicians to
enter key data relevant to the national service framework for coronary
heart disease.
The MIQUEST project is one of the national facilitating projects within
the NHS information management and technology strategy.8 It aims to help practices standardise their data entry and provides software to help with data extraction, including data required for
national performance indicators.
Knowledge about clinical governance and quality improvement
priorities
Many primary care practitioners remain unsure about the
meaning of clinical governance and about the changes needed within a
practice to implement it. There are many sources of practical advice on
clinical governance in primary care and on practice
development.9 Funding is available to support development of the practice team, such as the non-medical education and training levy, but this is not always applied effectively.10
often these will be based on health improvement programmes
(HimPs) developed by health authorities.
| |
Primary care groups and trusts: information for improving population health |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Practising clinicians need new clinical knowledge and
skills to improve and monitor the quality of care they provide
and
those leading the implementation of clinical governance at the level of
primary care groups or trusts face additional challenges. Clinical governance leaders will have to coordinate the collation of information for practical purposes such as assessing inequalities, needs
assessment, and national performance indicators. They will need to be
able to learn from others in primary care and to be able to get
research into practice by changing clinical behaviour.
Addressing inequalities in access to care and variation between
practices
Practices operate under very different circumstances, and
many outcomes may relate to social and demographic characteristics of
the population rather than the primary care they
receive.13 Primary care groups and trusts will have to
decide how much can be achieved by supporting practices to improve
performance, and how much effort needs to be directed in other ways,
such as efforts to reduce smoking in deprived populations.
Further developing the ability to assess local needs
Many publications are relevant to needs assessment in
primary care.15-17 Local annual public health reports give
some idea of how health authorities assess the needs of their local populations, and many are available on websites. Members of the primary
care team could have a key role in highlighting problems that need to
be addressed in local health improvement plans. Public involvement in
such work is also seen as important.18 Two questionnaires that can be used to assess patients' views of general practice are the
patient enablement instrument and the general practice assessment
survey.1
![]() |
| (Credit: LIANE PAYNE) |
Producing comparative national indicators for the primary care
group or trust
Computer skills vary considerably among clinicians within
practices. Uneven distribution of hardware and incompatibility of
different systems remain a problem, as does variable interest in
inputting and using information at the practice level. Even so, some
data can be collected across all practices in a primary care group or
trust to derive national performance indicators.14 If all
the practices in a primary care group or trust standardise their data
entry and have compatible systems the MIQUEST project can help with
data extraction.8
Support for developing clinical governance
Clinical governance leads in primary care groups and trusts
face numerous challenges. They will need to encourage practice teams to
adopt systems to reduce risk, including significant event
monitoring21; to respond to complaints and suggestions
from patients; and to comply with health and safety regulations.
Clinical Governance: a Practical Guide for Primary Care
Teams is aimed at helping primary care teams to decide where to
make a start with clinical governance,9 and table C on the BMJ's website shows other resources.
highlighting, for example, the central role of local opinion
leaders and the importance of linking audit to feedback to
participants.
23 24
Table D on the BMJ's
website gives sources of information on clinical audit and
effectiveness. The need for organisational development in order to
achieve change and quality improvement was discussed by Huntington et
al25; likely levers of change include revalidation, NHS
appraisal, and comparisons of the performance of local practices as
part of clinical governance. (The figure shows some of the key
activities for which knowledge and information are required for
clinical governance.)
| |
Problems that need to be solved |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Progress with clinical governance so far has depended on the dedication of a considerable proportion of clinicians working in primary care. Although there is an enormous amount that individuals and primary care group and trust leaders can do, the following issues still need to be addressed:
| |
Conclusion |
|---|
|
|
|---|
The additional knowledge required by everyone who
works in primary care to take on the new role of clinical governance is daunting. However, many sources of information are available. Clinical
governance offers the opportunity to all healthcare workers in primary
care to take charge of the agenda to improve the health and health care
of their local population while at the same time providing the
accountability that is now expected.
| |
Acknowledgments |
|---|
We thank our colleagues for their helpful comments on earlier drafts of this manuscript.
| |
Footnotes |
|---|
Series editor: Rebecca Rosen
URLs and links to information
sources are available on the BMJ's website
| |
References |
|---|
|
|
|---|
| 1. | Roland M, Holden J, Campbell S. Quality assessment for general practice; supporting clinical governance in PCGs. Manchester: National Primary Care Research and Development Centre, University of Manchester, 1998. www.npcrdc.man.ac.uk/ (accessed July 2000). |
| 2. |
Rosen R.
Improving quality in the changing world of primary care.
BMJ
2000;
321:
551-554 |
| 3. |
Pringle M.
Developing individuals for clinical governance.
BMJ
2000;
321:
737-740 |
| 4. |
Sackett DL, Richardson WS, Rosenberg W, Haynes RB.
Evidence-based medicine how to practice and teach EBM.
London: Churchill Livingstone, 1997.
|
| 5. |
Gray J, de Lusignan S.
National electronic Library for Health (NeLH).
BMJ
1999;
319:
1476-1479 |
| 6. |
McColl AJ, Smith H, White P, Field J.
General practitioners' perceptions of the route to evidence based medicine: a questionnaire survey.
BMJ
1998;
316:
361-365 |
| 7. |
Hunt DL, Haynes RB, Hanna SE, Smith K.
Effects of computer-based clinical decision support systems on physician performance and patient outcomes. A systematic review.
JAMA
1998;
280:
1339-1346 |
| 8. | Collection of Health Data from General Practice Project. www.nottingham.ac.uk/chdgp/ (accessed July 2000). |
| 9. | Roland M, Baker R. Clinical governance: a practical guide for primary care teams. Manchester: National Primary Care Research and Development Centre; Leicester: Clinical Governance Research and Development Unit, University of Leicester, 1999. www.npcrdc.man.ac.uk/ (accessed July 2000). |
| 10. | Department of Health. A review of continuous professional development in general practice. A report by the chief medical officer. London: Department of Health, 1997. |
| 11. |
McColl AJ, Roderick P, Gabbay J, Smith H, Moore M.
Performance indicators for primary care groups: an evidence based approach.
BMJ
1998;
317:
1354-1360 |
| 12. | Independent inquiry into inequalities in health. London: Stationery Office, 1998. |
| 13. |
Giufreda A, Gravelle H, Roland M.
Measuring quality with routine data: avoiding confusion between performance indicators and health outcomes.
BMJ
1999;
319:
94-98 |
| 14. |
McColl AJ, Roderick P, Smith H, Wilkinson EK, Moore M, Exworthy M, Gabbay J.
Clinical governance in primary care groups: the feasibility of deriving evidence-based performance indicators.
Quality in Health Care
2000;
9:
90-97 |
| 15. |
Murray S, Graham L.
Practice based health needs assessment: use of four methods in a small neighbourhood.
BMJ
1995;
310:
1443-1445 |
| 16. |
Stevens A, Raftery J.
Health care needs assessment the epidemiologically based needs assessment reviews.
Oxford: Radcliffe Medical, 1997.
|
| 17. |
Wilkinson JR, Murray SA.
Assessment in primary care: practical issues and possible approaches.
BMJ
1998;
316:
1524-1528 |
| 18. | NHS Executive. Patient and public involvement in the new NHS. Leeds: NHS Executive, 1999. www.doh.gov.uk/involve.htm (accessed July 2000). |
| 19. | Caldicott Committee. Report on the review of patient-identifiable information. London: Department of Health, 1997. |
| 20. | NHS Executive. Caldicott guardians in the NHS. Briefing note 01/99. Leeds: NHS Executive, 1999. on www.doh.gov.uk/nhsexec/briefnot/0199.htm (accessed July 2000). |
| 21. |
Pringle M.
Preventing ischaemic heart disease in one general practice: from one patient, through clinical audit, needs assessment, and commissioning into quality improvement.
BMJ
1998;
317:
1120-1124 |
| 22. | NHS Executive. Beacon services: part of the NHS learning network. Leeds: NHS Executive, 1999. www.nhsbeacons.org.uk/ (accessed July 2000). |
| 23. | NHS Centre for Reviews and Dissemination, University of York. Getting evidence into practice. London: Royal Society of Medicine Press, 1999. |
| 24. | Implementing clinical guidelines: can guidelines be used to improve clinical practice? Effective Health Care 1994;1(8). |
| 25. |
Huntington J, Gillam S, Rosen R.
Organisational development for clinical governance.
BMJ
2000;
321:
679-682 |
| 26. | Data Standards Team IMG. Data administration good practice guidelines for GP practices. Leeds: NHS Executive, 1997. |
| 27. |
Newrick DC, Spencer JA, Jones KP.
Collecting data in general practice: need for standardisation.
BMJ
1996;
312:
33-34 |
| 28. | NHS Executive. Information for Health: an information strategy for the modern NHS 1998-2005. Leeds: NHS Executive, 1998. www.doh.gov.uk/nhsexipu/strategy/index.htm (accessed July 2000). |
Read all Rapid Responses