Reinvigorating stagnant science: implementation laboratories and a meta-laboratory to efficiently advance the science of audit and feedback.
Where this comes from
- Record sourced from PubMed, PMID 30852557.
- Also identified by DOI 10.1136/bmjqs-2018-008355 and PMC identifier 6559780.
- Licence recorded as CC BY-NC.
- Because redistribution is not established, this page shows the abstract only. Follow the links below for the full text.
Abstract
Audit and feedback (A&F) is a commonly used quality improvement (QI) approach. A Cochrane review indicates that A&F is generally effective and leads to modest improvements in professional practice but with considerable variation in the observed effects. While we have some understanding of factors that enhance the effects of A&F, further research needs to explore when A&F is most likely to be effective and how to optimise it. To do this, we need to move away from two-arm trials of A&F compared with control in favour of head-to-head trials of different ways of providing A&F. This paper describes implementation laboratories involving collaborations between healthcare organisations providing A&F at scale, and researchers, to embed head-to-head trials into routine QI programmes. This can improve effectiveness while producing generalisable knowledge about how to optimise A&F. We also describe an international meta-laboratory that aims to maximise cross-laboratory learning and facilitate coordination of A&F research.
Medical subject headings
- Feedback
- Medical Audit
- Practice Patterns, Physicians'
- Quality Improvement