Skip to main content
PMC home page
The British Journal of General Practice logoLink to The British Journal of General Practice
. 1998 Feb;48(427):979–981.

A survey of audit activity in general practice.

H Hearnshaw 1, R Baker 1, A Cooper 1
PMCID: PMC1409969  PMID: 9624769

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Since 1991, all general practices have been encouraged to undertake clinical audit. Audit groups report that participation is high, and some local surveys have been undertaken, but no detailed national survey has been reported. AIM: To determine audit activities in general practices and the perceptions of general practitioners (GPs) regarding the future of clinical audit in primary care. METHOD: A questionnaire on audit activities was sent to 707 practices from 18 medical audit advisory group areas. The audit groups had been ranked by annual funding from 1992 to 1995. Six groups were selected at random from the top, middle, and lowest thirds of this rank order. RESULTS: A total of 428 (60.5%) usable responses were received. Overall, 346 (85%) responders reported 125.7 audits from the previous year with a median of three audits per practice. There was no correlation between the number of audits reported and the funding per GP for the medical audit advisory group. Of 997 audits described in detail, changes were reported as 'not needed' in 220 (22%), 'not made' in 142 (14%), 'made' in 439 (44%), and 'made and remeasured' in 196 (20%). Thus, 635 (64%) audits were reported to have led to changes. Some 853 (81%) of the topics identified were on clinical care. Responders made 242 (42%) positive comments on the future of clinical audit in primary care, and 152 (26%) negative views were recorded. CONCLUSION: The level of audit activity in general practice is reasonably high, and most of the audits result in change. The number of audits per practice seems to be independent of the level of funding that the medical audit advisory group has received. Although there is room for improvement in the levels of effective audit activity in general practice, continued support by the professionally led audit groups could enable all practices to undertake effective audit that leads to improvement in patient care.

Full text

PDF
980

Selected References

These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.

  1. Baker R., Hearnshaw H., Cooper A., Cheater F., Robertson N. Assessing the work of medical audit advisory groups in promoting audit in general practice. Qual Health Care. 1995 Dec;4(4):234–239. doi: 10.1136/qshc.4.4.234. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Baker R., Thompson J. Innovation in general practice: is the gap between training and non-training practices getting wider? Br J Gen Pract. 1995 Jun;45(395):297–300. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Bryce F. P., Neville R. G., Crombie I. K., Clark R. A., McKenzie P. Controlled trial of an audit facilitator in diagnosis and treatment of childhood asthma in general practice. BMJ. 1995 Apr 1;310(6983):838–842. doi: 10.1136/bmj.310.6983.838. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Chambers R., Bowyer S., Campbell I. Audit activity and quality of completed audit projects in primary care in Staffordshire. Qual Health Care. 1995 Sep;4(3):178–183. doi: 10.1136/qshc.4.3.178. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Davis D. A., Thomson M. A., Oxman A. D., Haynes R. B. Changing physician performance. A systematic review of the effect of continuing medical education strategies. JAMA. 1995 Sep 6;274(9):700–705. doi: 10.1001/jama.274.9.700. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Grimshaw J. M., Russell I. T. Effect of clinical guidelines on medical practice: a systematic review of rigorous evaluations. Lancet. 1993 Nov 27;342(8883):1317–1322. doi: 10.1016/0140-6736(93)92244-n. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Hearnshaw H. M., Baker R. H., Robertson N. Multidisciplinary audit in primary healthcare teams: facilitation by audit support staff. Qual Health Care. 1994 Sep;3(3):164–168. doi: 10.1136/qshc.3.3.164. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Lawrence M., Griew K., Derry J., Anderson J., Humphreys J. Auditing audits: use and development of the Oxfordshire Medical Audit Advisory Group rating system. BMJ. 1994 Aug 20;309(6953):513–516. doi: 10.1136/bmj.309.6953.513. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Lewis C., Combes D. Is general practice audit alive and well? The view from Portsmouth. Br J Gen Pract. 1996 Dec;46(413):735–736. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. MacPherson I., Bisset A. Not another questionnaire!: eliciting the views of general practitioners. Fam Pract. 1995 Sep;12(3):335–338. doi: 10.1093/fampra/12.3.335. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. Spencer J. Audit in general practice: where do we go from here? Qual Health Care. 1993 Sep;2(3):183–188. doi: 10.1136/qshc.2.3.183. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. Teasdale S. The future of clinical audit: learning to work together. BMJ. 1996 Sep 7;313(7057):574–574. doi: 10.1136/bmj.313.7057.574. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from The British Journal of General Practice are provided here courtesy of Royal College of General Practitioners

RESOURCES