Action research: a useful method of promoting change in primary care?

被引:19
|
作者
Hampshire, A [1 ]
Blair, M [1 ]
Crown, N [1 ]
Avery, A [1 ]
Williams, I [1 ]
机构
[1] Queens Med Ctr, Sch Med, Sch Community Hlth Sci, Div Gen Practice, Nottingham NG7 2UH, England
关键词
action research; primary health care; quality of care;
D O I
10.1093/fampra/16.3.305
中图分类号
R1 [预防医学、卫生学];
学科分类号
1004 ; 120402 ;
摘要
Background. Action research has been used successfully to promote change in disciplines other than medicine, but there are few examples of its use in primary care. Objective. We aimed to discuss the benefits and difficulties of using action research in primary care using the example of child health surveillance provision in general practice. Methods. Twenty-eight general practices were randomly allocated into two groups. Action research was used to promote change in 14 practices by facilitating practice meetings and by providing written feedback. The other 14 practices received written feedback alone. The two groups of practices were compared using the following: (i) semi-structured interviews with one health visitor and GP from each practice; (ii) observation of baby clinics; (iii) questionnaires to parents; and (iv) return rates of child health surveillance reviews from the personal child health record. Results. All 14 practices in the action research arm of the study met as individual practice tea ms and decided to make changes to their provision of chi Id health su relevance. Ten practices audited their child health surveillance as a result. More health visitors in the action research practices than in the comparison practices reported changes to child health surveillance, audit, communication and use of the personal child health record. The majority of health visitors and GPs thought involvement in the action research process was beneficial. However, we were unable to show a statistically significant difference between the two groups of practices in baby clinic provision, parent satisfaction or the return rate of child health surveillance reviews. Conclusion. Our study suggests that action research is a successful method of promoting change in primary care. However, measuring the impact of change is difficult.
引用
收藏
页码:305 / 311
页数:7
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Action research: a suitable method for promoting change in nurse education
    Smith, P
    Masterson, A
    Basford, L
    Boddy, G
    Costello, S
    Marvell, G
    Redding, M
    Wallis, B
    [J]. NURSE EDUCATION TODAY, 2000, 20 (07) : 563 - 570
  • [2] Promoting patient safety in primary care - Research, action, and leadership are required
    Wilson, T
    Pringle, M
    Sheikh, A
    [J]. BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL, 2001, 323 (7313): : 583 - 584
  • [3] Promoting research in primary care
    Lau, K. T.
    [J]. BRITISH DENTAL JOURNAL, 2019, 226 (08) : 540 - 540
  • [4] Promoting research in primary care
    K. T. Lau
    [J]. British Dental Journal, 2019, 226 : 540 - 540
  • [5] What is action research and can it promote change in primary care?
    Hampshire, AJ
    [J]. JOURNAL OF EVALUATION IN CLINICAL PRACTICE, 2000, 6 (04) : 337 - 343
  • [6] Innovative methods in promoting primary care research
    Sheikh, A
    Levy, M
    [J]. BRITISH JOURNAL OF GENERAL PRACTICE, 1999, 49 (446): : 752 - 753
  • [7] Environmental scans - How useful are they for primary care research?
    Graham, Paul
    Evitts, Trina
    Thomas-MacLean, Roanne
    [J]. CANADIAN FAMILY PHYSICIAN, 2008, 54 (07) : 1022 - 1023
  • [8] African Primary Care Research: Participatory action research
    Mash, Bob
    [J]. AFRICAN JOURNAL OF PRIMARY HEALTH CARE & FAMILY MEDICINE, 2014, 6 (01)
  • [9] Using action research to change health-promoting practice
    Casey, Dympna
    [J]. NURSING & HEALTH SCIENCES, 2007, 9 (01) : 5 - 13
  • [10] A Plan for Useful and Timely Family Medicine and Primary Care Research
    deGruy, Frank Verloin, III
    Ewigman, Bernard
    DeVoe, Jennifer E.
    Hughes, Lauren
    James, Paul
    Schneider, F. David
    Hickner, John
    Stange, Kurt
    Van Fossen, Tonya
    Kuzel, Anton J.
    Mullen, Rebecca
    Peek, C. J.
    [J]. FAMILY MEDICINE, 2015, 47 (08) : 636 - 642