...
  • 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>International journal of health care quality assurance >Editorial
【24h】

Editorial

机译：社论

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

Efficiency (doing things right) and effectiveness (doing the right things) are less commonly used but equally meaningful quality assurance definitions. If submissions to IJHCQA are a proxy measure then the efficiency-effectiveness definition deserves more limelight because service waste and lower quality are strongly tethered and evidence about their importance is growing. However, despite compelling evidence, expecting staff to comply; i.e., leading a horse to water and making it drink could be a book title about implementing evidence-based practice (EBP), which we can see from Praveen Rajasekhar et al's paper, poses several challenges for managers and practitioners. The authors use qualitative approaches to explore the reasons why practitioners did/did not implement one particular EBP. Knowing the reasons for successful implementation (e.g. using prominent posters that explain new policy and practice) and failure; i.e., staff not complying with the new practice (i.e. sceptical practitioners) helped the Quality Improvement in colonoscopy project managers to improve compliance, which also could be useful for related studies elsewhere.
机译：效率（正确地做事）和有效性（正确地做事）不那么常用，但是质量保证定义同样有意义。如果向IJHCQA提交的意见书是一种替代措施，那么效率-效果定义应引起更多关注，因为服务浪费和质量较低受到了严重束缚，并且有关其重要性的证据也在不断增加。然而，尽管有令人信服的证据，但期望员工遵守；也就是说，带领一匹马饮水和喝水可能是一本有关实施循证实践（EBP）的书，我们可以从Praveen Rajasekhar等人的论文中看到，这对管理人员和从业人员提出了一些挑战。作者使用定性方法探索了从业人员没有执行特定EBP的原因。了解成功实施的原因（例如使用醒目的海报来解释新的政策和做法）和失败的原因;也就是说，不遵守新做法的员工（即怀疑的从业人员）帮助改善了结肠镜检查项目经理的质量，从而提高了依从性，这对于其他地方的相关研究也可能是有用的。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号